Acceptance sampling

From formulasearchengine
Revision as of 08:58, 12 December 2013 by 117.194.4.149 (talk)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

In computational number theory, Cipolla's algorithm is a technique for solving a congruence of the form

x2≑n(modp).

where x,nβˆˆπ…p, so n is the square of x, and where p is an odd prime. Here 𝐅p denotes the finite field with p elements; {0,1,,pβˆ’1}. The algorithm is named after Michele Cipolla, an Italian mathematician who discovered it in the year 1907.

The algorithm

Inputs:

Outputs:

Step 1 is to find an aβˆˆπ…p such that a2βˆ’n is not a square. There is no known algorithm for finding such an a, except the trial and error method. Simply pick an a and by computing the Legendre symbol (a2βˆ’n|p) one can see whether a satisfies the condition. The chance that a random a will satisfy is (pβˆ’1)/2p. With p large enough this is about 1/2.[1] Therefore, the expected number of trials before finding a suitable a is about 2.

Step 2 is to compute x by computing x=(a+a2βˆ’n)(p+1)/2 within the field 𝐅p2=𝐅p(a2βˆ’n). This x will be the one satisfying x2=n.

If x2=n, then (βˆ’x)2=n also holds. And since p is odd, xβ‰ βˆ’x. So whenever a solution x is found, there's always a second solution, -x.

Example

(Note: All elements before step two are considered as an element of 𝐅13 and all elements in step two are considered as elements of 𝐅132).

Find all x such that x2=10.

Before applying the algorithm, it must be checked that 10 is indeed a square in 𝐅13. Therefore, the Legendre symbol (10|13) has to be equal to 1. This can be computed using Euler's criterion; (10|13)≑106≑1mod13. This confirms 10 being a square and hence the algorithm can be applied.

(2+βˆ’6)2=4+4βˆ’6βˆ’6=βˆ’2+4βˆ’6.
(2+βˆ’6)4=(βˆ’2+4βˆ’6)2=βˆ’1βˆ’3βˆ’6.
(2+βˆ’6)6=(βˆ’2+4βˆ’6)(βˆ’1βˆ’3βˆ’6)=9+2βˆ’6.
(2+βˆ’6)7=(9+2βˆ’6)(2+βˆ’6)=6.

So x=6 is a solution, as well as x=βˆ’6=7. Indeed, 62=36=10 and 72=49=10.

Proof

The first part of the proof is to verify that 𝐅p2=𝐅p(a2βˆ’n)={x+ya2βˆ’n:x,yβˆˆπ…p} is indeed a field. For the sake of notation simplicity, Ο‰ is defined as a2βˆ’n. Of course, a2βˆ’n is a quadratic non-residue, so there is no square root in 𝐅p. This Ο‰ can roughly be seen as analogous to the complex number i. The field arithmetic is quite obvious. Addition is defined as

(x1+y1Ο‰)+(x2+y2Ο‰)=(x1+x2)+(y1+y2)Ο‰.

Multiplication is also defined as usual. With keeping in mind that Ο‰2=a2βˆ’n, it becomes

(x1+y1Ο‰)(x2+y2Ο‰)=x1x2+x1y2Ο‰+y1x2Ο‰+y1y2Ο‰2=(x1x2+y1y2(a2βˆ’n))+(x1y2+y1x2)Ο‰.

Now the field properties have to be checked. The properties of closure under addition and multiplication, associativity, commutativity and distributivity are easily seen. This is because in this case the field 𝐅p2 is somewhat equivalent to the field of complex numbers (with Ο‰ being the analogon of i).
The additive identity is 0, more formal 0+0Ο‰: Let Ξ±βˆˆπ…p2, then

α+0=(x+yω)+(0+0ω)=(x+0)+(y+0)ω=x+yω=α.

The multiplicative identity is 1, or more formal 1+0Ο‰:

Ξ±β‹…1=(x+yΟ‰)(1+0Ο‰)=(xβ‹…1+0β‹…0(n2βˆ’a))+(xβ‹…0+1β‹…x)Ο‰=x+yΟ‰=Ξ±.

The only thing left for 𝐅p2 being a field is the existence of additive and multiplicative inverses. It is easily seen that the additive inverse of x+yΟ‰ is βˆ’xβˆ’yΟ‰, which is an element of 𝐅p2, because βˆ’x,βˆ’yβˆˆπ…p. In fact, those are the additive inverse elements of x and y. For showing that every non-zero element Ξ± has a multiplicative inverse, write down Ξ±=x1+y1Ο‰ and Ξ±βˆ’1=x2+y2Ο‰. In other words,

(x1+y1Ο‰)(x2+y2Ο‰)=(x1x2+y1y2(n2βˆ’a))+(x1y2+y1x2)Ο‰=1.

So the two equalities x1x2+y1y2(n2βˆ’a)=1 and x1y2+y1x2=0 must hold. Working out the details gives expressions for x2 and y2, namely

x2=βˆ’y1βˆ’1x1(y1(n2βˆ’a)βˆ’x12y1βˆ’1)βˆ’1,
y2=(y1(n2βˆ’a)βˆ’x12y1βˆ’1)βˆ’1.

The inverse elements which are shown in the expressions of x2 and y2 do exist, because these are all elements of 𝐅p. This completes the first part of the proof, showing that 𝐅p2 is a field.

The second and middle part of the proof is showing that for every element x+yΟ‰βˆˆπ…p2:(x+yΟ‰)p=xβˆ’yΟ‰. By definition, Ο‰2=a2βˆ’n is not a square in 𝐅p. Euler's criterion then says that

Ο‰pβˆ’1=(Ο‰2)pβˆ’12=βˆ’1.

Thus Ο‰p=βˆ’Ο‰. This, together with Fermat's little theorem (which says that xp=x for all xβˆˆπ…p) and the knowledge that in fields of characteristic p the equation (a+b)p=ap+bp holds, shows the desired result

(x+yΟ‰)p=xp+ypΟ‰p=xβˆ’yΟ‰.

The third and last part of the proof is to show that if x0=(a+Ο‰)p+12βˆˆπ…p2, then x02=nβˆˆπ…p.
Compute

x02=(a+Ο‰)p+1=(a+Ο‰)(a+Ο‰)p=(a+Ο‰)(aβˆ’Ο‰)=a2βˆ’Ο‰2=a2βˆ’(a2βˆ’n)=n.

Note that this computation took place in 𝐅p2, so this x0βˆˆπ…p2. But with Lagrange's theorem, stating that a non-zero polynomial of degree n has at most n roots in any field K, and the knowledge that x2βˆ’n has 2 roots in 𝐅p, these roots must be all of the roots in 𝐅p2. It was just shown that x0 and βˆ’x0 are roots of x2βˆ’n in 𝐅p2, so it must be that x0,βˆ’x0βˆˆπ…p.[2]

Speed of the algorithm

After finding a suitable a, the number of operations required for the algorithm is 4m+2kβˆ’4 multiplications, 4mβˆ’2 sums, where m is the number of digits in the binary representation of p and k is the number of ones in this representation. To find a by trial and error, the expected number of computations of the Legendre symbol is 2. But one can be lucky with the first try and one may need more than 2 tries. In the field 𝐅p2, the following two equalities hold

(x+yΟ‰)2=(x2+y2Ο‰2)+((x+y)2βˆ’x2βˆ’y2)Ο‰,

where Ο‰2=a2βˆ’n is known in advance. This computation needs 4 multiplications and 4 sums.

(x+yΟ‰)2(c+Ο‰)=(cdβˆ’b(x+d))+(d2βˆ’by)Ο‰,

where d=(x+yc) and b=ny. This operation needs 6 multiplications and 4 sums.

Assuming that p≑1(mod4), (in the case p≑3(mod4), the direct computation x≑±np+14 is much faster) the binary expression of (p+1)/2 has mβˆ’1 digits, of which k are ones. So for computing a (p+1)/2 power of (a+Ο‰), the first formula has to be used nβˆ’kβˆ’1 times and the second kβˆ’1 times.

For this, Cipolla's algorithm is better than the Tonelli-Shanks algorithm if and only if S(Sβˆ’1)>8m+20, with 2S being the maximum power of 2 which divides pβˆ’1.[3]

References

  1. ↑ R. Crandall, C. Pomerance Prime Numbers: A Computational Perspective Springer-Verlag, (2001) p. 157
  2. ↑ M. Baker Cipolla's Algorithm for finding square roots mod p
  3. ↑ Gonzalo Tornaria Square roots modulo p
  • E. Bach, J.O. Shallit Algorithmic Number Theory: Efficient algorithms MIT Press, (1996)

Template:Number theoretic algorithms