Re: GSOC 16, Improvements to sqrtm,logm and funm

[Marco Caliari]

On Tue, 8 Mar 2016, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:

> On Thu, 2016-03-03 at 14:09 +0100, Marco Caliari wrote:
> > In my humble opinion what is left is not enough for a GSOC. Jordi,
> > you are indicated a potential mentor, what do you think? Carnë?
>
> I think there's still lots of work to be done. Although Higham has
> published a lot of code, there are still things to be done. Not all of
> the work he and his colleagues have published has made it into free
> code; a lot of it is only in proprietary Matlab code. This includes
> some of the most interesting things, such as the funm function.

funm is here

http://www.maths.manchester.ac.uk/~higham/NAMF/

and Mudit worked on it

https://github.com/RickOne16/matrix/tree/master/funm

although the mex file swap.c is not included, yet.

> We are
> in effect reproducing many years of work by a large team of
> researchers. We're lucky that the papers all published; "all" that has
> to be done is distill the knowledge into Octave code. There's plenty
> of meat here for a GSoC project and beyond.
>
> For example, how much more work is there before the `mft_test` command
> available here passes on Octave? How about making it pass with speed
> comparable to Matlab?
>
>    http://www.maths.manchester.ac.uk/~higham/mftoolbox/

Maybe now I understand, I just considered the project title "improve logm, 
sqrtm, funm". You have something more in mind. Can you please elaborate 
your original idea? Which functions/packages would you like to pass on 
Octave?

Marco