Jump to content

Talk:Factorization of polynomials over finite fields

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 62.197.198.100 (talk) at 21:13, 6 March 2014 (Incorrect example). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Article needs improvement

This is just to say that a lot of work seems to be necessary here. Lots of stuff with little rhyme or reason, like the sectioning of the article; the subsection called "example" is hard to decipher, one wonders what this is an example of. Marc van Leeuwen (talk) 14:33, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article lacks a clear purpose. Cantor-Zassenhaus is given here even though it has its own wiki page, while recent algorithms with subquadratric complexity are not even mentioned. I propose deleting large portions, and reduce the article to a list of references to other places.MvH. —Preceding undated comment added 02:20, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Needs more Mathematical Methods and less computer algorithms

Most of the stuff here is talk of finding the factors algorithmically, but no sense of how to do so intuitively. Perhaps examples would help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.247.79.236 (talk) 17:30, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect example

The current example for factorization of:

f = x^11 + 2 x^9 + 2x^8 + x^6 + x^5 + 2x^3 + 2x^2 +1

says that the result is:

f= (x+1)(x^2+1)^3(x+2)^4

But that does not seem correct:

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=factor+x%5E11+%2B+2+x%5E9+%2B+2x%5E8+%2B+x%5E6+%2B+x%5E5+%2B+2x%5E3+%2B+2x%5E2+%2B1

or:

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=expand+%28x%2B1%29%28x%5E2%2B1%29%5E3%28x%2B2%29%5E4

Not sure what should be fixed: the polynomial or the factors?

PS: I'm new to editing of Wikipedia, feel free to remove this comment if not appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.197.198.100 (talk) 13:17, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article is correct, although the fact that the factorization is done modulo 3 is not clear enough. I have clarified this. To verify correctness, you have simply to add "mod 3" at the end of the command line of each link that you have provided. D.Lazard (talk) 17:35, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


In that case, I apologize for the noise. Please delete this note once you read it, thanks.