skip to main content
article
Free Access

Computational aspects of Hensel-type univariate polynomial greatest common divisor algorithms

Authors Info & Claims
Published:01 August 1974Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Two Hensel-type univariate polynomial Greatest Common Divisor (GCD) algorithms are presented and compared. The regular linear Hensel construction is shown to be generally more efficient than the Zassenhaus quadratic construction. The UNIGCD algorithm for UNIvariate polynomial GCD computations, based on the regular Hensel construction is then presented and compared with the Modular algorithm based on the Chinese Remainder Algorithm. From both an analytical and an experimental point of view, the UNIGCD algorithm is shown to be preferable for many common univariate GCD computations. This is true even for dense polynomials, which was considered to be the most suitable case for the application of the Modular algorithm.

References

  1. {BER67} Berlekamp, E. R., "Factoring Polynomials over Finite Field", Bell System Technical Journal, Vol. 46, 1967, pp. 1853--1859.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. {BR071} Brown, W. S., "On Euclid's Algorithm and the Computation of Polynomial Greatest Common Divisors", JACM, Vol. 18, No. 4, October 1971, pp. 478--504. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. {COL66} Collins, G. E., "Polynomial Remainder Sequence and Determinants", Am. Math. Monthly, 73, Aug.-Sept. 1966, pp. 708--712.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. {COL67} Collins, G. E., "Subresultant and Reduced Polynomial Remainder Sequences", JACM, Vol. 14, January 1967, pp. 128--142. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. {COL73} Collins, G. E., "The Computing Time of Euclindean Algorithm", Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory Memo AIM - 187, Stanford Computer Science Department Report CS - 331, January 1973. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. {HOR71} Horowitz, E., "Modular Arithmetic and Finite Field Theory", {PET71}, March 1971, pp. 188--194.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. {KNU69} Knuth, D. E., "The Art of Computer Programming", Vol. 2: Seminumerical Algorithms, Addison Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1969. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. {MUS71} Musser, D. R., "Algorithms for Polynomial Factorization", Ph.D. Thesis, Computer Science Department, University of Wisconsin, August 1971. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. {M&Y73} Moses, J., and Yun, D. Y. Y., "The EZ GCD Algorithm", Proceedings of ACM Annual Conference, August 1973, Atlanta, pp. 159--166. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. {PET71} "Proc. of the Second Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Manipulation", Petrick, S. R., ed., ACM, March 1971.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. {VDW49} Van Der Waerden, B. L., "Modern Algebra", Vol. 1, Frederic Ungar Publishing Co., N.Y., 1949.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. {W&R73} Wang, P. S., and Rothschile, L. P., "Factoring Multivariate Polynomials over the Integers", ACM SIGSAM Bulletin No. 28, Dec. 1973. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. {YUN73} Yun, D. Y. Y., "The Hensel Lemma in Algebraic Manipulation", Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Mathematics, MIT, November 1973.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. {ZAS69} Zassenhaus, H., "On Hensel Factorization I", Journal of Number Theory, Vol. 1, 1969, pp. 291--311.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Computational aspects of Hensel-type univariate polynomial greatest common divisor algorithms
    Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader