Differences between revisions 6 and 7
Revision 6 as of 2008-11-09 11:05:16
Size: 1208
Editor: was
Comment:
Revision 7 as of 2008-11-09 11:08:11
Size: 1413
Editor: was
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 12: Line 12:
    2. Doctest.     2. Doctest everything, making sure it all works 100% and fix issues with coercion, complex inputs, etc., as they are systematically uncovered.
    3. Possibly maybe change from digits to bits prec.
    4. Optimize.

Dokchitser Project for Sage Days 11

TODO:

  1. Stuff still computed using gp:
    • Delta polynomials in _recursions_at_infinity (search for comment below)
    • _without_gp (gamma_series) has this line
      • sinser = sage_eval(rs(gp_eval('Vec(sin(Pi*(%s)))'%(z0+x))))
    • init_Ginf: still uses pari (see below)
    • Ginf: still uses pari to evaluate continued fraction
  2. Doctest everything, making sure it all works 100% and fix issues with coercion, complex inputs, etc., as they are systematically uncovered.
  3. Possibly maybe change from digits to bits prec.
  4. Optimize.


From Jen:

Here's the version (closest to Dokchitser's original pari code) that still uses continued fraction approximation:

http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/jen/sage-3.0.5-x86_64-Linux/l4.py

(needs gamma_series.py to run:

http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/jen/sage-3.0.5-x86_64-Linux/gamma_series.py)

The version with Pade approximation (l5.py) has a negligible speedup but only really works for low precision. I'm not sure if Pade gives us a means of computing bounds (I think Mike Rubinstein said that continued fractions won't). Also, l4.py doesn't work for imaginary inputs yet - some coercion with SymbolicRing that I didn't try.

Dokchiter's Paper: attachment:dokchitser.pdf

days11/projects/dokchitser (last edited 2008-11-14 13:42:12 by anonymous)