I’m not positive now.
I tried @dpsanders’s solution on a larger —but still on topic—
problem and found a huge use of resources. Example below.
μ = [0,2,3,1] ν = [2,2,1,1] components = 4 # μ |> length vars = @variables y[1:components,1:components] constriction_list = Separator for i in 1:components push!(constriction_list, Separator(vars..., sum(vars[i,1:components]) == μ[i])) end for i in 1:components push!(constriction_list, Separator(vars..., sum(vars[1:components,i]) == ν[i])) end X = IntervalBox(0..(components*components), (components*components)) # domain for c1 in constriction_list X = c1(X) end ini = ∩(constriction_list, constriction_list) for ci in constriction_list[3:end] ini = ∩(ini, ci) end p = pave(ini, X, 1e-2) unique(integerize.(p.boundary))
So, is this (large memory usage) an issue with the way I extended the solution or indeed
is not apt to this new problem?
ps1. I was unable to use a function for the previous code. I had a problem similar to
The applicable method may be too new: running in world age 28047, while current world is 28055.
ps2. In case someone wants to copy-paste code from this post, you need to add to @dpsanders’s code