John Cremona on Fri, 05 Feb 2021 17:49:56 +0100 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: New GP function ellrank (2-descent) |
Bill, This is great news! When mwrank is completely redundant then I can really retire. Some questions: 1. When you show that the output is [1,1,[]] you are asserting that the rank is exactly 1 even though you do not (yet) have any points. Are you using the theorem that (analytic rank=1) => (rank=1)? 2. Do you also use (analytic rank=0) => (rank=0)? In both these cases, is the determination of the analytic rank rigorous? 3. Is the list of points always independent (modulo torsion)? Denis's output sometimes included torsion and/or included dependent points (if I recall correctly). 4. For analytic rank 1 curves do you use ellheegner() instead of descent? I hope so since ellheegner is totally and utterly brilliant! John On Fri, 5 Feb 2021 at 16:11, Bill Allombert <Bill.Allombert@math.u-bordeaux.fr> wrote: > > Dear PARI developers, > > I have added a new GP function 'ellrank' to the master branch. > This is a port of Denis Simon GP script ellQ.gp. > However the interface is different, it returns [r,R,V] where r is a > lower bound for the rank, R is an upper bound and V is a list of point. > If the full gorup is determined, r==R==#V. > > ? E = ellinit([-157^2,0]); > ? ellrank(E) > %2 = [1,1,[]] > The rank is 1 but no points was found. > It is possible to ask ellrank to try harder > ? ellrank(E,10) > %5 = > [1,1,[[-43565582610691407250551997/609760250665615167250729,562653616877773225244609387368307126580/476144382506163554005382044222449067]]] > > It should compare favorably to John Cremona mwrank (which use a > different algorithm), except it does not do saturation yet, but this > will be added soon. > > Finally, I like to thanks Denis Simon for improving ellQ.gp over all > this years. > > Cheers, > Bill >