Difference between revisions of "ApCoCoA-1:NCo.SetOrdering"

From ApCoCoAWiki
(New page: <command> <title>NCo.SetOrdering</title> <short_description> Set an admissible ordering on <tt><X></tt>. </short_description> <syntax> NCo.SetOrdering(Ordering:STRING) </syntax> <des...)
 
Line 10: Line 10:
 
Note that the default ordering is <quotes>LLEX</quotes> (length-lexicographic ordering).
 
Note that the default ordering is <quotes>LLEX</quotes> (length-lexicographic ordering).
 
<itemize>
 
<itemize>
<item>@param <em>Ordering</em>: a string which indicates an (admissible) ordering. For the time being, the package supports <quotes>LLEX</quotes> (length-lexicographic ordering), <quotes>ELIM</quotes> (elimination ordering) and <quotes>LRLEX</quotes> (length-reverse-lexicographic ordering).</item>
+
<item>@param <em>Ordering</em>: a string which indicates an (admissible) ordering. For the time being, the package supports <quotes>LLEX</quotes> (the length-lexicographic ordering), <quotes>ELIM</quotes> (an elimination ordering) and <quotes>LRLEX</quotes> (the length-reverse-lexicographic ordering).</item>
 
</itemize>
 
</itemize>
Let <tt>X=x_{1}x_{2}...x_{n}</tt>. We define the (left-to-right) lexicographic ordering <quotes>LEX</quotes> on <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt> as follows. For two words <tt>W1, W2</tt> in <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt>, we say <tt>W1&gt;_{Lex}W2</tt> if we have <tt>W1=W2*W</tt> for some non-empty word <tt>W</tt> in <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt>, or if we have <tt>W1=W*x_{i}*W3, W2=W*x_{j}*W4</tt> for some words <tt>W,W3,W4</tt> in <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt> and some letters <tt>x_{i},x_{j}</tt> in <tt>X</tt> such that <tt>i&lt;j</tt>. Thus, we have <tt>x_{1}&gt;_{LEX}x_{2}&gt;_{LEX}...&gt;_{LEX}x_{n}</tt>. Note that <quotes>LEX</quotes>  is not an admissible ordering on <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt>. We define admissible orderings <quotes>LLEX</quotes>, <quotes>ELIM</quotes> and <quotes>LRLEX</quotes> on <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt> as follows.
+
Let <tt>X=x_{1}x_{2}...x_{n}</tt>. We define the (left-to-right) lexicographic ordering <quotes>LEX</quotes> on <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt> as follows. For two words <tt>W1, W2</tt> in <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt>, we say <tt>W1&gt;_{Lex}W2</tt> if we have <tt>W1=W2*W</tt> for some non-empty word <tt>W</tt> in <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt>, or if we have <tt>W1=W*x_{i}*W3, W2=W*x_{j}*W4</tt> for some words <tt>W,W3,W4</tt> in <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt> and some letters <tt>x_{i},x_{j}</tt> in <tt>X</tt> such that <tt>i&lt;j</tt>. Thus, we have <tt>x_{1}&gt;_{LEX}x_{2}&gt;_{LEX}...&gt;_{LEX}x_{n}</tt>. Note that <quotes>LEX</quotes>  is not an admissible ordering on <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt>. We define admissible orderings <quotes>LLEX</quotes>, <quotes>ELIM</quotes> and <quotes>LRLEX</quotes> on <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt> as follows.
 
<itemize>
 
<itemize>
 
<item><quotes>LLEX</quotes>: for two words <tt>W1, W2</tt> in <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt>, we say <tt>W1&gt;_{LLEX}W2</tt> if <tt>len(W1)&gt;len(W2)</tt>, or <tt>len(W1)=len(W2)</tt> and <tt>W1</tt> is lexicographically larger than <tt>W2</tt>.</item>
 
<item><quotes>LLEX</quotes>: for two words <tt>W1, W2</tt> in <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt>, we say <tt>W1&gt;_{LLEX}W2</tt> if <tt>len(W1)&gt;len(W2)</tt>, or <tt>len(W1)=len(W2)</tt> and <tt>W1</tt> is lexicographically larger than <tt>W2</tt>.</item>
<item><quotes>ELIM</quotes>: it first compares the associated commutative terms lexicographically and then breaks ties using the non-commutative lexicographic orderin with respect to <tt>x_{1}&gt;...&gt;x_{n}</tt>. That is, for two words <tt>W1, W2</tt> in <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt>, we say <tt>W1&gt;_{ELIM}W2</tt> if <tt>W1</tt> is lexicographically larger than <tt>W2</tt> by considering <tt>W1, W2</tt> as two terms in the commutative case, or <tt>W1=W2</tt> by considering <tt>W1, W2</tt> as two terms in the commutative case and <tt>W1&gt;_{Lex}W2</tt> (<tt>W1</tt> is left-to-right lexicographically larger than <tt>W2</tt> by considering <tt>W1, W2</tt> as two words in the non-commutative case). Thus, the elimination ordering <quotes>ELIM</quotes> first eliminates the letter <tt>x_{1}</tt>, and then <tt>x_{2}</tt>, and then <tt>x_{3}</tt>, and so on and so forth.</item>
+
<item><quotes>ELIM</quotes>: it first compares the associated commutative terms lexicographically and then breaks ties using the non-commutative lexicographic ordering with respect to <tt>x_{1}&gt;...&gt;x_{n}</tt>. That is, for two words <tt>W1, W2</tt> in <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt>, we say <tt>W1&gt;_{ELIM}W2</tt> if <tt>W1</tt> is lexicographically larger than <tt>W2</tt> by considering <tt>W1, W2</tt> as two terms in the commutative case, or <tt>W1=W2</tt> by considering <tt>W1, W2</tt> as two terms in the commutative case and <tt>W1&gt;_{Lex}W2</tt> (<tt>W1</tt> is left-to-right lexicographically larger than <tt>W2</tt> by considering <tt>W1, W2</tt> as two words in the non-commutative case). Thus, the elimination ordering <quotes>ELIM</quotes> first eliminates the letter <tt>x_{1}</tt>, and then <tt>x_{2}</tt>, and then <tt>x_{3}</tt>, and so on and so forth.</item>
 
<item><quotes>LRLEX</quotes>: for two words <tt>W1, W2</tt> in <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt>, we say <tt>W1&gt;_{LRLEX}W2</tt> if <tt>len(W1)&gt;len(W2)</tt>, or <tt>len(W1)=len(W2)</tt> and <tt>W1</tt> is larger than <tt>W2</tt> by right-to-left lexicographic ordering.</item>
 
<item><quotes>LRLEX</quotes>: for two words <tt>W1, W2</tt> in <tt>&lt;X&gt;</tt>, we say <tt>W1&gt;_{LRLEX}W2</tt> if <tt>len(W1)&gt;len(W2)</tt>, or <tt>len(W1)=len(W2)</tt> and <tt>W1</tt> is larger than <tt>W2</tt> by right-to-left lexicographic ordering.</item>
 
</itemize>
 
</itemize>

Revision as of 19:08, 25 April 2013

NCo.SetOrdering

Set an admissible ordering on <X>.

Syntax

NCo.SetOrdering(Ordering:STRING)

Description

Note that the default ordering is "LLEX" (length-lexicographic ordering).

  • @param Ordering: a string which indicates an (admissible) ordering. For the time being, the package supports "LLEX" (the length-lexicographic ordering), "ELIM" (an elimination ordering) and "LRLEX" (the length-reverse-lexicographic ordering).

Let X=x_{1}x_{2}...x_{n}. We define the (left-to-right) lexicographic ordering "LEX" on <X> as follows. For two words W1, W2 in <X>, we say W1>_{Lex}W2 if we have W1=W2*W for some non-empty word W in <X>, or if we have W1=W*x_{i}*W3, W2=W*x_{j}*W4 for some words W,W3,W4 in <X> and some letters x_{i},x_{j} in X such that i<j. Thus, we have x_{1}>_{LEX}x_{2}>_{LEX}...>_{LEX}x_{n}. Note that "LEX" is not an admissible ordering on <X>. We define admissible orderings "LLEX", "ELIM" and "LRLEX" on <X> as follows.

  • "LLEX": for two words W1, W2 in <X>, we say W1>_{LLEX}W2 if len(W1)>len(W2), or len(W1)=len(W2) and W1 is lexicographically larger than W2.

  • "ELIM": it first compares the associated commutative terms lexicographically and then breaks ties using the non-commutative lexicographic ordering with respect to x_{1}>...>x_{n}. That is, for two words W1, W2 in <X>, we say W1>_{ELIM}W2 if W1 is lexicographically larger than W2 by considering W1, W2 as two terms in the commutative case, or W1=W2 by considering W1, W2 as two terms in the commutative case and W1>_{Lex}W2 (W1 is left-to-right lexicographically larger than W2 by considering W1, W2 as two words in the non-commutative case). Thus, the elimination ordering "ELIM" first eliminates the letter x_{1}, and then x_{2}, and then x_{3}, and so on and so forth.

  • "LRLEX": for two words W1, W2 in <X>, we say W1>_{LRLEX}W2 if len(W1)>len(W2), or len(W1)=len(W2) and W1 is larger than W2 by right-to-left lexicographic ordering.

An admissible ordering on is called length compatible if len(W1)>len(W2) implies W1 is larger than W2 for all W1, W2 in <X>. For instance, "LLEX" and "LRLEX" are length compatible while "ELIM" is not.

Example

NCo.RingEnv();
Coefficient ring : Q
Ordering : LLEX
-------------------------------
NCo.SetOrdering(<quotes>ELIM</quotes>);
NCo.RingEnv();
Coefficient ring : Q
Ordering : ELIM
-------------------------------

See also

NCo.UnsetOrdering

Introduction to CoCoAServer