Talk:Cantor–Zassenhaus algorithm

Latest comment: 4 years ago by Etoombs in topic Error in describing characteristic 2
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cantor–Zassenhaus algorithm. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:29, 14 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Error in describing characteristic 2

edit

The text says

It proceeds as follows, in the case where the field {\displaystyle \mathbb {F} _{q}} \mathbb {F} _{q} is of odd-characteristic. The process can be generalised to characteristic 2 fields in a fairly straightforward way: Select a random polynomial {\displaystyle b(x)\in R} b(x)\in R such that {\displaystyle b(x)\neq 0,\pm 1} b(x)\neq 0,\pm 1. Set {\displaystyle m=(q^{d}-1)/2} m=(q^{d}-1)/2 and compute {\displaystyle b(x)^{m}} b(x)^{m}

But this is wrong; if q is 2 then m is not an integer. The text needs to be fixed. I am not sure how, though.

Arghman (talk) 13:36, 18 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

If q is even (and in fact in all cases), you can use m=(q**d-1)/(smallest prime factor of (q**d-1)). But this is not efficient for q=2 and d odd. See https://arxiv.org/pdf/1012.5322.pdf for more efficient approaches. MeanStandev (talk) 20:51, 27 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

@MeanStandev: I read the paper you posted. Thanks. It was very helpful. In it, it said that if q = 2 and d is odd, then you can just do a quadratic field extension to get q=4 instead. This forces a factor of 3 in q**d - 1. There is a faster way, though, for all cases of q=2. See [1] when they talk about test polynomials of the form sum_i T**(2**i), where i is in [0, d - 1] and T is a random starter polynomial. I will say, though, the only "fairly straightforward" case is when there's a factor of 3 in q**d - 1. Etoombs (talk) 21:33, 1 March 2020 (UTC)Reply