)
b = GF(p)(b*y)
b,r,x,m = step3(b,p,r,x)
return x
a = GF(17)(13)
print s_root(a,17)
Steffen
On 9 Nov., 21:50, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I see. In my example a was
>
> sage: type(a)
>
>
> John
>
> On 09/11
p = next_prime(2^(512))
while p % 4 != 1:
p = next_prime(p+1)
for i in range(0,n):
A[i] = GF(p).random_element()
#print 'Original:'
#time X = go1(p)
#analyseResult(A,X,p)
print 'Tonelli:'
time X = go2(p)
analyseResult(A,X,p)
-- Steffen
--~--~-~--~~--
Hi, I needed some calculation period benchmark for pairings. I could
not find anything build in, but the following implementation solved my
problem:
http://maths.straylight.co.uk/archives/104
Cheers, Steffen
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email
Hi,
I am the guy who asked the question in the LiDIA mailing list. Yes,
Z_q means the finite field F(p), so I will look have a look at Sage.
Cheers, Steffen
On 2 Okt., 03:26, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/1/07, John Cremona <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w
the incorporation of LiDIA code into Sage, what
appears to be a problem since its C++. I would be really happy to use
Sage since it contains the polynomial stuff I need. If any exprienced
Sage user has a suggestion how to use Sage in C++ I would be really
thankful.
Cheers, Steffen
On Oct 3, 3:44
ating the polynomial
increases nearly linearly with the second parameter of the
"random_element" function.
So I am wondering if my understanding of the parameters of
"random_elment" is wrong or if this function really produces such
results, which I do not rega
under the value 0. If the value 0
gains the same importance as all other values in the corresponding set
of values, than the multiple occurance of 0 is a repetition, too.
I am quite new in SAGE and have no idea how sage code looks like, but
I will have a look and see if I can do some changes :-)
Ch
On 17 Okt., 06:20, cwitty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 8:32 pm, "didier deshommes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > 2007/10/16, Steffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > > Hi didier,
>
> > > the implementation does not
On Oct 24, 5:45 am, "didier deshommes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2007/10/23, Steffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Exactly, thats one of two points. The maximum degree in every variable
> > is (maximum total degree of resulting polynomial) / (number of
&g
than the implementation.
>
> For boolean multivariate polynomials, it makes sense to talk about
> the number of terms of a random polynomial of a given degree, because
> you are working with a finite space, but this has a very different
> feel than a random polynomial over an infini
On 26 Okt., 18:30, "didier deshommes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2007/10/26, Steffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
Ok, here an example. Lets take a polynomial over
F:=GF(nextprime(2**42)) in two variables x and y and a maximum total
degree of 3.
>
> > 1) Po
sage
newbie and probably its again only a command that I cant find. I tried
sqrt? and similar things, but only got the information that sqrt is a
symbolic function. Could somebody tell me which algo is implemented or
better how to find the implemented algo.
Cheers, Steffen
sage
newbie and probably its again only a command that I cant find. I tried
sqrt? and similar things, but only got the information that sqrt is a
symbolic function. Could somebody tell me which algo is implemented or
better how to find the implemented algo.
Cheers, Steffen
failed but extend was True, or the generic
algorithm is better
return IntegerMod_abstract.sqrt(self, extend=extend, all=all)
The easier %4 == 3 case seems to be implemented efficiently, but the
%4 == 1 not. The algo from Tonelli and Shanks might be a good solution
here. Any thoughts on other
Hi! When running any `@interact` code in jupyterlab, I get a javascript
error instead:
150.3e1e5adfd821b9b9…e5adfd821b9b96340:1 Error: Module
@jupyter-widgets/base, version ^1.2.0 is not registered, however,
2.0.0 is
at f.loadClass (134.bcbea9feb6e7c4da…6e7c4da7530:1:74977)
at f
15 matches
Mail list logo
