07.01.2013 Views

Dietzfelbinger M. Primality testing in polynomial time ... - tiera.ru

Dietzfelbinger M. Primality testing in polynomial time ... - tiera.ru

Dietzfelbinger M. Primality testing in polynomial time ... - tiera.ru

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

32 3. Fundamentals from Number Theory<br />

and<br />

bi = ai−1−qibi−1 = nxa,i−1+mya,i−1−qi(nxb,i−1+myb,i−1) =nxb,i+myb,i.<br />

In particular, the coefficients xa,t and ya,t stored <strong>in</strong> xa and ya after the last<br />

iteration of the loop satisfy gcd(n, m) =at = nxa,t + mya,t, as claimed. ⊓⊔<br />

Concern<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>ru</strong>nn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>time</strong> of the Extended Euclidean Algorithm, we<br />

note that the analysis <strong>in</strong> Lemma 3.2.3(a) carries over, so on <strong>in</strong>put n, m<br />

O(m<strong>in</strong>{log(n), log(m)}) arithmetic operations are carried out. As for the cost<br />

<strong>in</strong> terms of bit operations, we note without proof that the number of bit<br />

operations is bounded by O(log(n) log(m)) just as <strong>in</strong> the case of the simple<br />

Euclidean Algorithm.<br />

3.3 Modular Arithmetic<br />

We now turn to a different view on rema<strong>in</strong>ders: modular arithmetic. Let<br />

m ≥ 2begiven(the“modulus”). We want to say that look<strong>in</strong>g at an <strong>in</strong>teger<br />

a we are not really <strong>in</strong>terested <strong>in</strong> a but only <strong>in</strong> the rema<strong>in</strong>der a mod m. Thus,<br />

all numbers that leave the same rema<strong>in</strong>der when divided by m are considered<br />

“similar”. We def<strong>in</strong>e a b<strong>in</strong>ary relation on Z.<br />

Def<strong>in</strong>ition 3.3.1. Let m ≥ 2 be given. For arbitrary <strong>in</strong>tegers a and b we say<br />

that a is cong<strong>ru</strong>ent to b modulo m and write<br />

a ≡ b (mod m)<br />

if a mod m = b mod m.<br />

The def<strong>in</strong>ition immediately implies the follow<strong>in</strong>g properties of the b<strong>in</strong>ary<br />

relation “cong<strong>ru</strong>ence modulo m”.<br />

Lemma 3.3.2. Cong<strong>ru</strong>ence modulo m is an equivalence relation, i.e., we<br />

have<br />

Reflexivity: a ≡ a (mod m),<br />

Symmetry: a ≡ b (mod m) implies b ≡ a (mod m), and<br />

Transitivity: a ≡ b (mod m) and b ≡ c (mod m) implies a ≡ c (mod m). ⊓⊔<br />

Further, it is almost immediate from the def<strong>in</strong>itions of a mod m and of ≡<br />

that<br />

a ≡ b (mod m) if and only if m divides b − a. (3.3.5)<br />

(Write a = mq + r and b = mq ′ + r ′ with 0 ≤ r, r ′

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!