Matrix Representations of Derivations for Low-Dimensional Mock-Lie Algebras

Bouzid Mosbahi; Imed Basdouri

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Matrix Representations of Derivations for Low-Dimensional Mock-Lie Algebras

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read For every non-abelian Mock-Lie algebra of dimension at most four, the paper lists explicit matrix forms for all derivations, with five distinct forms in dimension four.

desk verdict A correct but unevenly written computational catalogue of derivation matrices for low-dimensional Mock-Lie algebras; the main gap is the unproven completeness of the imported classification. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.15064 v1 pith:BQJCNOZR submitted 2025-04-21 math.RA

Imed Basdouri , Bouzid Mosbahi This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.RA MSC 16W1016D70

keywords Mock-Liealgebraderivationmatrixrepresentationlow-dimensionalalgebrasJacobi-JordanclassificationofcommutativeJacobiidentity

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

A Mock-Lie algebra is a vector space with a commutative product that satisfies the Jacobi identity; this paper asks what its derivations—linear maps obeying $d([x,y])=[d(x),y]+[x,d(y)]$—look like in dimensions up to four. The answer is a complete list of matrix forms: one for the non-abelian two-dimensional class, two for the three-dimensional classes, and five for the four-dimensional classes, each relative to the ordered bases of the classification table. The matrices are found by imposing the derivation condition on every basis pair and solving the resulting linear equations, so the derivation algebra becomes an explicit subalgebra of matrix space. The payoff is that the size and shape of $\mathrm{Der}(L)$ for every low-dimensional Mock-Lie algebra is laid out directly, with diagonal entries forced to pair up in patterns such as $d_{22}=2d_{11}$.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the basis version of the derivation identity: a linear map $d$ is a derivation exactly when $d([e_i,e_j])=[d(e_i),e_j]+[e_i,d(e_j)]$ for every pair of basis vectors (Lemma 2.4). The paper feeds the sparse product table of each isomorphism class into these equations and solves for the matrix entries $d_{ij}$. The recurring structural pattern is that each non-abelian class is generated by square relations of the form $e_i\cdot e_i=e_k$, so the derivation condition forces diagonal entries to scale those relations, producing constraints like $d_{22}=2d_{11}$ and $d_{44}=2d_{33}$, while off-diagonal entries either stay free or are paired by symmetry, as in $d_{13}=-d_{31}$.

What would settle it

Enumerate all isomorphism classes of four-dimensional Mock-Lie algebras over an algebraically closed field of characteristic not 2 or 3. If the enumeration contains a non-abelian class not present in Table 1, compute its derivation matrices with the paper's basis-pair method; a derivation matrix that does not match one of the five forms in Theorem 3.3 would refute the theorem.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central result is a complete matrix description of the derivation algebra of every Mock-Lie algebra of dimension at most four. For the two-dimensional algebra whose only nonzero product is the square $e_1\cdot e_1=e_2$, a derivation matrix has $d_{12}=0$ and $d_{22}=2d_{11}$, with $d_{21}$ free. In three dimensions there are two matrix kinds, corresponding to the classes $A_{1,2}\oplus A_{0,1}$ and $A_{1,3}$; in four dimensions there are five kinds, corresponding to the five non-abelian isomorphism classes in Table 1. The matrices record exactly which entries vanish, which remain free, and which are forced into relations such as $d_{13}=-d_{31}$ or $d_{11}=d_{44}-d_{33}$. Abelian algebras are set aside because with zero product every linear map is a derivation.

Load-bearing premise

The list of derivation matrices is only as complete as Table 1, which the paper imports from earlier work without proof; the argument also silently assumes that every product not displayed in Table 1 is zero, so if an isomorphism class is missing or an omitted bracket is nonzero, the five-form claim collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For the two-dimensional non-abelian Mock-Lie algebra, the derivation algebra has dimension two, with free parameters $d_{11}$ and $d_{21}$.
In three dimensions, the derivation algebra of $A_{1,2}\oplus A_{0,1}$ has five free parameters and that of $A_{1,3}$ has four, so the two isomorphism classes are distinguished by the size of their derivation algebras.
In four dimensions, each of the five non-abelian classes carries an explicit subalgebra of $\mathrm{M}_4(F)$, so membership in $\mathrm{Der}(L)$ becomes a finite list of linear equations on matrix entries.
A change of basis conjugates the derivation matrix, so the displayed forms describe each derivation algebra up to simultaneous conjugation.
For abelian Mock-Lie algebras the zero product makes every linear map a derivation, so the matrix description is trivial and the paper's results concern the non-abelian classes.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The paper leaves implicit that every product not displayed in Table 1 is zero; the proofs evaluate brackets such as $[e_2,e_3]$ as zero without stating this rule, so making that convention explicit and checking all basis pairs would turn the verification into a purely mechanical computation.
Counting free parameters in the displayed matrices yields dimension formulas for $\mathrm{Der}(L)$—for example, two in the two-dimensional case and five and four in the two three-dimensional cases—and tabulating those dimensions across the five four-dimensional classes would give a concrete invariant that can distinguish non-isomorphic Mock-Lie algebras.
Applied to higher-dimensional classifications, the same basis-pair method would predict that derivation matrices are determined by which basis vectors square to which other vectors, so the diagonal-pairing patterns seen here may persist in a general formula.
The five-form claim depends on the classification being over algebraically closed fields of characteristic not 2 or 3; over other fields extra isomorphism classes could appear, and the matrix list would have to grow.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Punchline: this is a small computational catalogue — explicit derivation matrices for all Mock-Lie algebras of dimension up to four — and the central computation is correct. The presentation is uneven and completeness rests on an imported classification, but for a specialist the tables are useful.

What’s new: the matrices themselves, which do not appear in the cited papers as far as the authors show. The method is standard linear algebra on a known classification, which is fine; a catalogue doesn’t need new technique. I spot-checked Theorem 3.1 and a few cases in 3.3 by substituting into Definition 2.3, and the displayed matrices are consistent, under the natural convention that products not listed in Table 1 are zero.

Soft spots: the written proofs are much sketchier than the claims. Theorem 3.1’s proof contains a false displayed equation: it writes d(e2)=d11e1+d21e2, then later 0=d(e2)=d12e1+d22e2, which cannot both be right; the correct statement is d(e2)=d12e1+d22e2 with d12=0 and d22=2d11. The proof of Theorem 3.2(A) similarly jumps from the derivation condition to d(e3)=d31e1+d33e3 without showing d32=0. Cases (D) and (E) of Theorem 3.3 are asserted with ‘expanding the derivations’ and no details. These gaps are fixable, but as written they make verification harder than it should be.

The load-bearing assumption is the completeness of Table 1, imported from [5,6,7]. If the classification misses an isomorphism class, the ‘five kinds’ claim fails. The authors never state the zero-product convention explicitly, though every calculation uses it. This should be stated and, ideally, the classification table should be reproduced with a reference to the specific theorem in Poonen or Burde–Fialowski.

The citation pattern is sloppy: the reference list includes duplicates ([11]=[12], [28] overlaps [13]) and several unrelated papers, including hydrokinetic turbine papers [23–27]. That is unprofessional but not a scientific flaw.

Overall: the central computation is right, the exposition is not. This is exactly the kind of paper that deserves a serious referee but needs a careful revision before acceptance. A referee should ask for a statement of the zero-product convention, a checkpoint that Table 1 is complete, and cleaned-up proofs for the skipped cases.

Who this is for: specialists in Mock-Lie/Jacobi–Jordan algebras working on rigidity or cohomology. I wouldn’t cite it in my own work this year, but I’d send it to a colleague in that area. It deserves peer review, not desk reject.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies derivations of Mock-Lie algebras of dimension at most four. After recalling the definitions of Mock-Lie algebras and derivations, it imports a classification table of all such algebras of dimension at most four from the literature and then solves the derivation condition d([x,y]) = [d(x),y] + [x,d(y)] on basis elements for each non-abelian isomorphism class. The main results are Theorems 3.1--3.3, which list explicit matrix forms for the derivation algebra of the two-dimensional algebra, the two three-dimensional non-abelian algebras, and the five four-dimensional non-abelian algebras in the table. The paper concludes that these matrices give all derivations of the corresponding Mock-Lie algebras.

Significance. If the main claim holds, the paper provides a complete and explicit description of Der(L) for all Mock-Lie algebras of dimension at most four over the underlying field. This would be a useful reference result, since derivation algebras are basic invariants that appear in cohomology and deformation questions. I verified by direct substitution into Definition 2.3 that the displayed matrices are consistent with the stated products under the zero-product convention, so the computational core appears sound. However, the written proofs are uneven: several displayed equations are incorrect, the most delicate four-dimensional cases are asserted with almost no computation, and the completeness of the enumeration depends on an imported classification table together with an unstated convention that all unlisted products are zero. The paper would be a solid contribution after these issues are fixed.

major comments (3)

[Section 3, Table 1] The completeness of Theorems 3.1--3.3 is entirely inherited from Table 1, whose classification is imported from references [5,6,7] without proof or even a precise statement of the hypotheses (e.g., algebraically closed field, characteristic not 2 or 3). Since Theorem 3.3 asserts that there are 'five kinds', any missing isomorphism class would invalidate the statement. Moreover, the proofs repeatedly evaluate brackets that are not listed in Table 1 as zero, for instance Theorem 3.2(A) uses [e1,e3] = 0 to conclude d13 = 0. The paper should state explicitly that every product not displayed in Table 1 is zero, and it should either prove the classification for n ≤ 4 or quote the exact classification theorem from the cited references.
[Theorem 3.3(D) and (E)] The proofs of cases (D) and (E) are not supplied. For (D), the proof states only 'we obtain d22 = 2(d44 - d33)', without deriving the other constraints that make the matrix take the displayed form, such as d11 = d44 - d33, d14 = 0, d34 = 0. For (E), the proof is the single sentence 'Expanding the derivations, we derive constraints on the coefficients', with no equations shown. These are the two cases with nontrivial mixed products (e1 · e3 = e4 and e3 · e4 = e2), and the displayed matrices have non-obvious entries such as d13 = -d41 and d14 = -d31. Please provide the full linear system and its solution for these two cases.
[Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 3.2(A)] The proofs of the low-dimensional cases contain incorrect displayed equalities that prevent the reader from verifying the result as written. In Theorem 3.1, step 1 writes d(e2) = d11e1 + d21e2, which is the expansion of d(e1), not d(e2); step 2 then writes 0 = d(e2) = d12e1 + d22e2, contradicting step 1. In Theorem 3.2(A), the proof states d(e3) = d31e1 + d33e3, but the displayed matrix has third column (0, d23, d33)^T, so d31 is not a coefficient of d(e3); the conclusion d32 = 0 is also not what needs to be shown. These errors are likely notational, since direct computation gives the stated matrices, but the written derivations must be corrected.

minor comments (4)

[Theorems 3.1--3.3] The phrase 'all elements of the matrix are complex numbers over a field F' is confusing. Either specify that the ground field is C, or say that the entries lie in F.
[References] Reference [7] is a duplicate of [1]. Many of the references in the list, especially [10]--[33], are unrelated to the content of this paper and appear to be self-citations; these should be trimmed to sources actually used in the derivation or classification.
[Acknowledgment] The acknowledgment thanking 'the referee for the helpful comments and suggestions' is inappropriate in the submitted version and should be removed.
[Table 1] The notation A0,1, A1,2, A1,3, A1,4, A2,4 is not defined in the paper. It should be introduced or explicitly tied to the notation of the cited classification references.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the derivation matrices are solved directly from the definition of a derivation and an externally cited classification table, with no fitted prediction and no load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that every derivation matrix has the listed form—is obtained by applying Definition 2.3 to the multiplication table in Table 1 and solving the resulting linear equations, rather than by fitting a parameter to the output or by defining the output into existence. The only imported ingredient is the classification of Mock-Lie algebras in dimensions at most 4, taken from references [5,6,7]; that classification is not equivalent to the derivation matrices, is not proved in this paper, and is not a self-citation of the present authors. There is no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem imported from the authors' own prior work, and no ansatz smuggled in via citation. Concerns such as the implicit convention that products not displayed in Table 1 are zero, and the completeness of that table, bear on correctness rather than circularity; likewise, any omitted constraints or apparent typos in the proofs would be computational gaps, not circular reductions. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained relative to the stated external classification input.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or invented entities appear. The mathematics uses only standard linear algebra plus two imported domain assumptions: the completeness of the classification table and the convention that unlisted products vanish.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption The classification of Mock-Lie algebras of dimension n <= 4 given in Table 1 is complete and correct.
The paper imports Table 1 from references [5,6,7] without proof; Theorems 3.1 through 3.3 enumerate derivations for exactly these classes.
domain assumption Each algebra in Table 1 is defined by the displayed multiplication relations, with all omitted products equal to zero.
The proofs substitute d(e_i) into bracket identities and evaluate products such as [e2,e3] as zero based on the displayed table; this convention is implicit and never stated.
standard math Linear maps are determined by their action on a basis, so checking the derivation identity on basis elements is sufficient (Lemma 2.4).
Used in every proof; standard linear algebra.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Matrix Representations of Derivations for Low-Dimensional Mock-Lie Algebras." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BQJCNOZR

@misc{pith2026250415064,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Matrix Representations of Derivations for Low-Dimensional Mock-Lie Algebras},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BQJCNOZR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.15064}
}

read the original abstract

In this work, we study the matrix representation of derivations for Mock-Lie algebras with dimensions up to four. Using matrix methods, we examine their structure and properties, showing how these derivations help us better understand the algebraic nature of Mock-Lie algebras.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

Rota-Type Operators on 2-Dimensional Pre-Lie Algebras
math.RA 2025-04 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

The paper attempts to classify Rota-type operators on all 2-dimensional complex pre-Lie algebras, but the proofs and tables contain errors, including operator matrices that fail their own defining equations.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[12]

Zahari, A., Mosbahi, B., & Basdouri, I. (2023). Classiﬁc ation, Derivations and Centroids of Low-Dimensional Compl ex BiHom-Trialgebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.06781

arXiv 2023
[28]

Mosbahi, B., Zahari, A., Basdouri, I. (2023). Classiﬁca tion, α -Inner Derivations and α -Centroids of Finite-Dimensional Complex Hom-Trialgebras. Pure and App lied Mathematics Journal, 12(5), 86-97. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.pamj.20231205.12

doi:10.11648/j.pamj.20231205.12 2023
[13]

Mosbahi, B., Zahari, A., & Basdouri, I. (2023). Classiﬁc ation, α -Inner Derivations and α -Centroids of Finite-Dimensional Complex Hom-Trialgebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.0047 1

arXiv 2023
[2]

L., & Militaru, G

Agore, A. L., & Militaru, G. (2015). On a type of commutativ e algebras. Linear Algebra and its Applications, 485, 222-2 49

work page 2015
[3]

Baklouti, A., & Benayadi, S. (2021). Symplectic Jacobi-J ordan algebras. Linear and Multilinear Algebra, 69(8), 155 7-1578

work page 2021
[4]

Okubo, S., & Kamiya, N. (1997). Jordan–Lie super algebra a nd Jordan–Lie triple system. Journal of algebra, 198(2), 388-411

work page 1997
[5]

Zusmanovich, P. (2017). Special and exceptional mock-Li e algebras. Linear Algebra and its Applications, 518, 79-96

work page 2017
[6]

Poonen, B. (2008). Isomorphism types of commutative alge bras of ﬁnite rank over an algebraically closed ﬁeld. Comput a- tional arithmetic geometry, 463, 111-120

work page 2008

Show all 31 references

[7]

Burde, D., & Fialowski, A. (2014). Jacobi–Jordan algebra s. Linear Algebra and its Applications, 459, 586-594

2014
[8]

Zhevlakov, K. A. (1966). Solvability and nilpotence of Jo rdan rings. Algebra i Logika, 5(3), 37-58

1966
[9]

Pouye, M., & Kpamegan, B. (2022). Extensions, crossed mod ules and pseudo quadratic Lie type superalgebras

2022
[10]

Sania, A., Imed, B., Mosbahi, B., & Saber, N. (2023). Coho mology of compatible BiHom-Lie algebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.12906

2023 arXiv
[14]

Mosbahi, B., Asif, S., & Zahari, A. (2023). Classiﬁcatio n of tridendriform algebra and related structures. arXiv pr eprint arXiv:2305.08513

2023 arXiv
[15]

A., Zahari, A., & Mosbahi, B

Fiidow, M. A., Zahari, A., & Mosbahi, B. (2023). Quasi-Ce ntroids and Quasi-Derivations of Low Dimensional Associat ive Algebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.14331

2023 arXiv
[16]

Asif, S., Wang, Y., Mosbahi, B., & Basdouri, I. (2023). Co homology and deformation theory of O-operators on Hom-Lie conformal algebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.04121

2023 arXiv
[17]

Mansuroglu, N., & Mosbahi, B. (2024). On structures of Bi Hom-Superdialgebras and their derivations. arXiv preprin t arXiv:2404.12098

2024 arXiv
[18]

Mansuroglu, N., & Mosbahi, B. (2024). Generalized deriv ations of BiHom-supertrialgebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.12112

2024 arXiv
[19]

Mainellis, E., Mosbahi, B., & Zahari, A. (2024). Cohomol ogy of BiHom-Associative Trialgebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.15567

2024 arXiv
[20]

Mainellis, E., Mosbahi, B., & Zahari, A. (2024). Compati ble Associative Algebras and Some Invariants. arXiv prepri nt arXiv:2405.18243

2024 arXiv
[21]

Imed, B., & Mosbahi, B. (2024). Classiﬁcation of ( ρ, τ, σ )-derivations of two-dimensional left-symmetric dialgeb ras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.05716

2024 arXiv
[22]

Imed, B., Lerbet, J., & Mosbahi, B. (2024). Quasi-Centro ids and Quasi-Derivations of low-dimensional Zinbiel alge bras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.09532

2024 arXiv
[23]

Mosbahi, M., Elgasri, S., Lajnef, M., Mosbahi, B., & Dris s, Z. (2021). Performance enhancement of a twisted Savonius hydrokinetic turbine with an upstream deﬂector. Internati onal Journal of Green Energy, 18(1), 51-65

2021
[24]

Mosbahi, M., Lajnef, M., Derbel, M., Mosbahi, B., Aric` o , C., Sinagra, M., & Driss, Z. (2021). Performance improveme nt of a drag hydrokinetic turbine. Water, 13(3), 273

2021
[25]

Mosbahi, M., Derbel, M., Lajnef, M., Mosbahi, B., Driss, Z., Aric` o, C., & Tucciarelli, T. (2021). Performance study of twisted Darrieus hydrokinetic turbine with novel blade des ign. Journal of Energy Resources Technology, 143(9), 09130 2

2021
[26]

Mosbahi, M., Lajnef, M., Derbel, M., Mosbahi, B., Driss, Z., Aric` o, C., & Tucciarelli, T. (2021). Performance impro vement of a Savonius water rotor with novel blade shapes. Ocean Engi neering, 237, 109611

2021
[27]

Mosbahi, M., Derbel, M., Hannachi, M., Mosbahi, B., Dris s, Z., Aric` o, C., & Tucciarelli, T. (2023). Performance stu dy of spiral Darrieus water rotor with V-shaped blades. Proceedi ngs of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Jour nal of Mechanical Engineering Sc...

2023
[29]

Z., & MOSBAHI, B

ABDOU, A. Z., & MOSBAHI, B. (2024). CLASSIFICATION OF COM PATIBLE ASSOCIATIVE ALGEBRAS AND SOME INV ARIANTS. Available at SSRN 4877916

2024
[30]

Makhlouf, A., & Zahari, A. (2020). Structure and classiﬁ cation of Hom-associative algebras. Acta et Commentatione s Universitatis Tartuensis de Mathematica, 24(1), 79-102. 8 IMED BASDOURI 1, BOUZID MOSBAHI 2

2020
[31]

On BiHom-Associative dialgebr as.Open Journal of Mathematical Sciences, Vol

Zahari, A.; Bakayoko, I. On BiHom-Associative dialgebr as.Open Journal of Mathematical Sciences, Vol. 7, No. 1 (202 3).pp. 96-117
[32]

Imed, B., Lerbet, J., & Mosbahi, B. (2024). Central deriv ations of low-dimensional Zinbiel algebras. arXiv preprin t arXiv:2411.15642

2024 arXiv
[33]

Imed, B., & Mosbahi, B. (2024). Rota-type operators on 2- dimensional dendriform algebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.15358. [10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26 , 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33] 1Department of Mathematics, F aculty of Sciences, Unive...

2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [12]

Zahari, A., Mosbahi, B., & Basdouri, I. (2023). Classiﬁc ation, Derivations and Centroids of Low-Dimensional Compl ex BiHom-Trialgebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.06781

arXiv 2023

[2] [28]

Mosbahi, B., Zahari, A., Basdouri, I. (2023). Classiﬁca tion, α -Inner Derivations and α -Centroids of Finite-Dimensional Complex Hom-Trialgebras. Pure and App lied Mathematics Journal, 12(5), 86-97. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.pamj.20231205.12

doi:10.11648/j.pamj.20231205.12 2023

[3] [13]

Mosbahi, B., Zahari, A., & Basdouri, I. (2023). Classiﬁc ation, α -Inner Derivations and α -Centroids of Finite-Dimensional Complex Hom-Trialgebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.0047 1

arXiv 2023

[4] [2]

L., & Militaru, G

Agore, A. L., & Militaru, G. (2015). On a type of commutativ e algebras. Linear Algebra and its Applications, 485, 222-2 49

work page 2015

[5] [3]

Baklouti, A., & Benayadi, S. (2021). Symplectic Jacobi-J ordan algebras. Linear and Multilinear Algebra, 69(8), 155 7-1578

work page 2021

[6] [4]

Okubo, S., & Kamiya, N. (1997). Jordan–Lie super algebra a nd Jordan–Lie triple system. Journal of algebra, 198(2), 388-411

work page 1997

[7] [5]

Zusmanovich, P. (2017). Special and exceptional mock-Li e algebras. Linear Algebra and its Applications, 518, 79-96

work page 2017

[8] [6]

Poonen, B. (2008). Isomorphism types of commutative alge bras of ﬁnite rank over an algebraically closed ﬁeld. Comput a- tional arithmetic geometry, 463, 111-120

work page 2008