|
Size: 81
Comment:
|
← Revision 3 as of 2012-02-21 12:18:29 ⇥
Size: 936
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 4: | Line 4: |
== Progress == We had a discussion Monday afternoon. The short summary: * We agree that objects like matrices, vectors and subspaces should be stored as an approximation and a separate precision object (rather than as a "array" of p-adic entries). * Things like kernels should give the maximum kernel. If A is a singular matrix, then any ball around A contains invertible matrices. So when a user asks for the rank we should give them the minimum rank among all matrices equivalent to the given approximation modulo the precision; if they ask for the kernel we give them the linear space containing all possible kernels. * Precision objects for subspaces can be thought of as balls in the tangent space to the corresponding Grassmanian. * We should use the templates being developed for Qp and Zp in the linear algebra context as well. |
People interested
John Voight, David Roe, Xavier Caruso, Kiran Kedlaya
Progress
We had a discussion Monday afternoon. The short summary:
- We agree that objects like matrices, vectors and subspaces should be stored as an approximation and a separate precision object (rather than as a "array" of p-adic entries).
- Things like kernels should give the maximum kernel. If A is a singular matrix, then any ball around A contains invertible matrices. So when a user asks for the rank we should give them the minimum rank among all matrices equivalent to the given approximation modulo the precision; if they ask for the kernel we give them the linear space containing all possible kernels.
- Precision objects for subspaces can be thought of as balls in the tangent space to the corresponding Grassmanian.
- We should use the templates being developed for Qp and Zp in the linear algebra context as well.