<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Blackbox computation of A-infinity structures</title>
	<atom:link href="http://infinity.blogseminar.net/2008/02/06/blackbox-computation-of-a-infinity-structures/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://infinity.blogseminar.net/2008/02/06/blackbox-computation-of-a-infinity-structures/</link>
	<description>Blogging ... up to homotopy.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 03:41:24 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mikael Vejdemo Johansson</title>
		<link>http://infinity.blogseminar.net/2008/02/06/blackbox-computation-of-a-infinity-structures/#comment-214</link>
		<dc:creator>Mikael Vejdemo Johansson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 17:35:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://infinity.blogseminar.net/2008/02/06/blackbox-computation-of-a-infinity-structures/#comment-214</guid>
		<description>$H^{*}(C_{5},Z/5)$ would indeed have arity up to 5, but it is a much more subtle interplay than just group order. For instance, my and Ainhoas results show that $H^{*}(C_{n}\times C_{n},Z/p)$ has unbounded structures with respect to the arity. So group order is far from the only factor in determining these structures.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><math xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML' display='inline'><msup><mi>H</mi> <mo>*</mo></msup><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>C</mi> <mn>5 </mn></msub><mo>,</mo><mi>Z</mi><mo stretchy="false">/</mo><mn>5 </mn><mo stretchy="false">)</mo></math> would indeed have arity up to 5, but it is a much more subtle interplay than just group order. For instance, my and Ainhoas results show that <math xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML' display='inline'><msup><mi>H</mi> <mo>*</mo></msup><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>C</mi> <mi>n</mi></msub><mo>&times;</mo><msub><mi>C</mi> <mi>n</mi></msub><mo>,</mo><mi>Z</mi><mo stretchy="false">/</mo><mi>p</mi><mo stretchy="false">)</mo></math> has unbounded structures with respect to the arity. So group order is far from the only factor in determining these structures.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Stasheff</title>
		<link>http://infinity.blogseminar.net/2008/02/06/blackbox-computation-of-a-infinity-structures/#comment-213</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Stasheff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 16:00:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://infinity.blogseminar.net/2008/02/06/blackbox-computation-of-a-infinity-structures/#comment-213</guid>
		<description>Mikael wrote:

This example shows us that the only higher products and quasi-isomorphism components that do not vanish in H *(C 3,Z/3) have arity 2 and 3. 

Is it that arity greater than 3 is prohibited
by the order of the group?
e.g. would H *(C 5,Z/5) have arity up to 5?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mikael wrote:</p>
<p>This example shows us that the only higher products and quasi-isomorphism components that do not vanish in H *(C 3,Z/3) have arity 2 and 3. </p>
<p>Is it that arity greater than 3 is prohibited<br />
by the order of the group?<br />
e.g. would H *(C 5,Z/5) have arity up to 5?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mikael Vejdemo Johansson</title>
		<link>http://infinity.blogseminar.net/2008/02/06/blackbox-computation-of-a-infinity-structures/#comment-196</link>
		<dc:creator>Mikael Vejdemo Johansson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Feb 2008 11:50:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://infinity.blogseminar.net/2008/02/06/blackbox-computation-of-a-infinity-structures/#comment-196</guid>
		<description>Actually, it occurred to me. When computing Ext(k,k) over a group ring, we have the obvious way to construct, step by step, a minimal resolution. From the minimal resolution, we can deduce generators and relations. And we know when we have it all, as it were, by virtue of the Carlson/Benson stopping criteria.

For monomial rings, I know that there are good methods to get hold of the Poincare-Betti series given a presentation of the ring. And certainly, with an initial portion of a minimal resolution computed, it is easy to start constructing a finite presentation. However, I haven't heard of anything resembling these stopping criteria.

John: are you able to sit down with a ring presentation (local, monomial, Adams graded - throw any nicety properties you want at it ;) and work out a finite presentation of Ext(k,k) as a k-algebra from it? Or is the obsession with Poincare-Betti series I remember rooted in ring structures being too difficult to get hold of?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, it occurred to me. When computing Ext(k,k) over a group ring, we have the obvious way to construct, step by step, a minimal resolution. From the minimal resolution, we can deduce generators and relations. And we know when we have it all, as it were, by virtue of the Carlson/Benson stopping criteria.</p>
<p>For monomial rings, I know that there are good methods to get hold of the Poincare-Betti series given a presentation of the ring. And certainly, with an initial portion of a minimal resolution computed, it is easy to start constructing a finite presentation. However, I haven&#8217;t heard of anything resembling these stopping criteria.</p>
<p>John: are you able to sit down with a ring presentation (local, monomial, Adams graded - throw any nicety properties you want at it <img src='http://infinity.blogseminar.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> and work out a finite presentation of Ext(k,k) as a k-algebra from it? Or is the obsession with Poincare-Betti series I remember rooted in ring structures being too difficult to get hold of?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mikael Vejdemo Johansson</title>
		<link>http://infinity.blogseminar.net/2008/02/06/blackbox-computation-of-a-infinity-structures/#comment-195</link>
		<dc:creator>Mikael Vejdemo Johansson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Feb 2008 00:08:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://infinity.blogseminar.net/2008/02/06/blackbox-computation-of-a-infinity-structures/#comment-195</guid>
		<description>I'm using the Magma modules built by Jon F. Carlson for computing the cohomology data. Of course, once the homological algebra handling in Magma gets expanded to handle non-group-algebra rings, there's nothing that prevents my code from working with those - however, the homological algebra code currently in there is built for the express purpose of computing group cohomology rings, and functions such as computing projective resolution and computing cohomology ring generators and relations only work if the BasicAlgebra (the data type for path algebra quotients) is a group ring.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m using the Magma modules built by Jon F. Carlson for computing the cohomology data. Of course, once the homological algebra handling in Magma gets expanded to handle non-group-algebra rings, there&#8217;s nothing that prevents my code from working with those - however, the homological algebra code currently in there is built for the express purpose of computing group cohomology rings, and functions such as computing projective resolution and computing cohomology ring generators and relations only work if the BasicAlgebra (the data type for path algebra quotients) is a group ring.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Palmieri</title>
		<link>http://infinity.blogseminar.net/2008/02/06/blackbox-computation-of-a-infinity-structures/#comment-194</link>
		<dc:creator>John Palmieri</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 19:38:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://infinity.blogseminar.net/2008/02/06/blackbox-computation-of-a-infinity-structures/#comment-194</guid>
		<description>Looks fun.  I suppose it requires a group as input.  Would it be conceivable to put in other sorts of augmented algebras instead, to find A-infinity structures on their Ext algebras?

(I've never used Magma, so I don't know how much you're using already existing Ext calculations, versus writing your own.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Looks fun.  I suppose it requires a group as input.  Would it be conceivable to put in other sorts of augmented algebras instead, to find A-infinity structures on their Ext algebras?</p>
<p>(I&#8217;ve never used Magma, so I don&#8217;t know how much you&#8217;re using already existing Ext calculations, versus writing your own.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
