Its easy to compute eulers phi of small numbers, there are even many online sites that offer such functions. But what when the numbers are really huge, I mean like 2^128? How can I compute an eulers phi function of such high number? Can I use my desktop pc for this?
If you know the prime factors, then yes. But in general you can't do it efficiently, at least not in a way anyone knows of. If we could compute the totient function in general, then we could get it for n = pq, where p and q are primes, which would be (p-1)(q-1). So n - phi(n) = p + q - 1, and we then know p+q = c. Then (p+q)^2 = c^2, so p^2 + q^2 = c^2 - 2n. But then (p-q)^2 = p^2 + q^2 - 2pq = c^2 - 4n. So we know p+q and p-q, from which we can get p and q.
This would break RSA encryption
Related
I am trying to write a short C++ routine to calculate the following function F(i,j,z) for given integers j > i (typically they lie between 0 and 100) and complex number z (bounded by |z| < 100), where L are the associated Laguerre Polynomials:
The issue is that I want this function to be callable from within a CUDA kernel (i.e. with a __device__ attribute). Standard library/Boost/etc functions are therefore out of the questions, unless they are simple enough to re-implement on my own - this especially relates to the Laguerre polynomials which exist in Boost and C++17. Regardless if I manage to wrap any standard function for Laguerre polynomials, I still have a similar pre-factor to calculate of the form (z^j/j!).
Question: How can I do a relatively simple implementation of such a function, without introducing significant numerical instability?
My idea so far is to calculate L and its pre-factor independently. The pre-factor I will calculate by first looping from 0 to j-i and calculate (z^1 * z^2/2 * ... * z^(j-1)/(j-i)!). I will then calculate the remaining factor exp(-|z|^2/2) *(j-i)! * sqrt(i!/j!) (either in a similar way, or through the Gamma-function, which is implemented in CUDA math). The idea is then to find a minimal algorithm to calculate the associated Laguerre polynomial, unless I manage to wrap an implementation from e.g. Boost or GNU C++.
Edit/side note: The expression for F actually blows up numerically for some values of i/j. It was derived wrong in the source where I got it, and the indices of the associated Laguerre polynomials should instead be L_i^(j-i). That does not invalidate the approaches suggested in the answers/comments.
I recommend finding a recurrence relation for the coefficients of the Laguerre Polynomial:
C(k+1) = g(k)C(k)
g(k) = C(k+1) / C(k)
g(k) = -z * (j - k) / ((j - i + k + 1) * (k + 1)) //Verify this yourself :)
This allows you to avoid most of factorials in computing the polynomial.
After that I would follow Severin's idea of doing the calculations in logarithms
so as to not overload the double floating point range:
log(F) = log(sqrt(i!/j!)) - |z|^2 + (j-i) * log(-z) + log(L(|z|^2))
log(L) = log((2*j - i)!) + log(sum) // where the summation is computed using the recurrence relation above
and using the fact that:
log(a!) = sum(k=1..a, log(k))
and also:
log(z) = log(|z|) + I * arg(z) for complex z
log(-z) = log(|z|) + I * arg(-z)
log(-z) = log(|z|) - I * arg(z)
for the log(sqrt(i!/j!)) part I would do (assuming that j >= i):
log(sqrt(i!/j!))
= 0.5 * (log(i!) - log(j!))
= -0.5 * sum(k==i+1..j, log(k))
I haven't tried this out so there could definitely be little mistakes here and there. This answer is more about the technique rather than a copy-paste-ready answer
Well, what you should do is to logarithm it
Assuming natural logarithm,
q = log(z^j/j!) = log(z^j) - log(j!) = j*log(z) - log(Gamma(j+1))
First term is simple, second term is standard C++ function lgamma(x) (or you could use GSL).
compute value of q and return cexp(q)
You could fold exponent in this method as well
Motivation. It is well known that generating function for Catalan numbers satisfies quadratic equation. I would like to have first several coefficients of a function, implicitly defined by an algebraic equation (not necessarily a quadratic one!).
Example.
import sympy as sp
sp.init_printing() # math as latex
from IPython.display import display
z = sp.Symbol('z')
F = sp.Function('F')(z)
equation = 1 + z * F**2 - F
display(equation)
solution = sp.solve(equation, F)[0]
display(solution)
display(sp.series(solution))
Question. The approach where we explicitly solve the equation and then expand it as power series, works only for low-degree equations. How to obtain first coefficients of formal power series for more complicated algebraic equations?
Related.
Since algebraic and differential framework may behave differently, I posted another question.
Sympy: how to solve differential equation in formal power series?
I don't know a built-in way, but plugging in a polynomial for F and equating the coefficients works well enough. Although one should not try to find all coefficients at once from a large nonlinear system; those will give SymPy trouble. I take iterative approach, first equating the free term to zero and solving for c0, then equating 2nd and solving for c1, etc.
This assumes a regular algebraic equation, in which the coefficient of z**k in the equation involves the k-th Taylor coefficient of F, and does not involve higher-order coefficients.
from sympy import *
z = Symbol('z')
d = 10 # how many coefficients to find
c = list(symbols('c:{}'.format(d))) # undetermined coefficients
for k in range(d):
F = sum([c[n]*z**n for n in range(k+1)]) # up to z**k inclusive
equation = 1 + z * F**2 - F
coeff_eqn = Poly(series(equation, z, n=k+1).removeO(), z).coeff_monomial(z**k)
c[k] = solve(coeff_eqn, c[k])[0]
sol = sum([c[n]*z**n for n in range(d)]) # solution
print(series(sol + z**d, z, n=d)) # add z**d to get SymPy to print as a series
This prints
1 + z + 2*z**2 + 5*z**3 + 14*z**4 + 42*z**5 + 132*z**6 + 429*z**7 + 1430*z**8 + 4862*z**9 + O(z**10)
I've been wrestling with this issue for a week and I just need some guidance on the math part of it. If I could just understand the math behind it I could piece together the functions to make it work. The assignment is;
Design and develop a C++ program for Calculating e(n) when delta <= 0.000001
e(n-1) = 1 + 1/1! + 1/2! + 1/3! + 1/4! + … + 1/(n-1)!
e(n) = 1 + 1/1! + 1/2! + 1/3! + 1/4! + … + 1/(n)!
delta = e(n) – e(n-1)
You do not have any input to the program. Your output should be something like this:
N = 2 e(1) = 2 e(2) = 2.5 delta = 0.5
N = 3 e(2) = 2.5 e(3) = 2.565 delta = 0.065
...
You must use recursive function calls.
My first issue is the math and the variables that would contain them.
the delta, e(n), and e(n-1) variable must doubles
if e(n) = 1 + 1 / 1! = 2 then e(n-1) must equal 1, which means delta = 1 (that's my thinking anyway) I'm just not sure of the math behind the .5 delta the first time and the 0.065 in the second iteration.
Can someone point me in the right direction on this problem?
Thank you,
T
From the wikipedia link, you can see that
I will not explain the notion of limits here, but what this basically means is that, if we define a function e where e(n) = 1 + 1/1! + 1/2! + 1/3! + 1/4! + … + 1/(n)! (which is the function given in your problem), we are able to approximate the real value of the constant e.
The higher n is, the closer we get from e.
If you look closely at the function, you can see that each time, we add a term which is smaller than the previous one: 1 >= 1/1! >= 1/2! >= .... >= 1/(n)!
That basically means that, every time we increase n we are getting closer to e but we are slowing down in the way.
The real value of e is 2.71828...
In our first step e(1) = 1, we are 1.71828... too far from the real value
In the second step e(2) = 2, we are at 0.71828..., 1 distance closer
In the third step e(3) = 2.5, we are now at 0.21828..., 0.5 distance closer
As you can see, we are getting there, but the closer we get, the slower we move. Now let's say that at each step, we want to know how close we have moved compared to the previous value.
We then do simply e(n) - e(n-1). This is basically what the delta means.
At some point, we are moving so slow that it does no longer make any sense to keep going. We are almost staying put. At this point, we decide that our approximation is close enough from e.
In your case, the problem defines the minimum progression speed to 0.000001
here is a solution :-
delta = e(n) - e(n-1)
delta = 1/n!
delta < 0.000001
n! > 1000000
n >= 10 as 10! = 3628800
Using Chebyshev polynomials, we can compute sin(2*Pi/n) exactly using the CGAL and CORE library, like the following piece of codes:
#include <CGAL/CORE_Expr.h>
#include <CGAL/Polynomial.h>
#include <CGAL/number_utils.h>
//return sin(theta) and cos(theta) for theta = 2pi/n
static std::pair<AA, AA> sin_cos(unsigned short n) {
// We actually use -x instead of x since root_of will give the k-th
// smallest root but we want the second largest one without counting.
Polynomial x(CGAL::shift(Polynomial(-1), 1));
Polynomial twox(2*x);
Polynomial a(1), b(x);
for (unsigned short i = 2; i <= n; ++i) {
Polynomial c = twox*b - a;
a = b;
b = c;
}
a = b - 1;
AA cos = -CGAL::root_of(2, a.begin(), a.end());
AA sin = CGAL::sqrt(AA(1) - cos*cos);
return std::make_pair(sin, cos);
}
But if I want to compute sin(2*m*Pi/n) exactly, where m and n are integers, what is the formula of the polynomial that I should use? Thanks.
(Partial solution.)
This is essentially computing the real and imaginary part of the roots of unity as algebraic numbers. Let's denote w(m) = exp(2*pi*I*m/n). Then, w(m) itself is a complex root of En(x) = x^n-1.
You need to find a defining polynomial of Re(w(m)). Resultants are a tool to find such a polynomial: 2*Re(w(m)) is a root of Res (En(x-y), En(y); y).
For an explanation why this is the case: Note that 2*Re(w(m)) = w(m) + conj(w(m)), and that the complex roots of En come in conjugate pairs; hence, also conj(w(m)) is a root of En. Now loosely speaking, the En(y) part "constrains" y to be any (complex) root of En, and combining this with the first argument allows x to take any complex value such that x-y is a root of En as well. Hence, a possible assignment is y = conj(w(m)) and x-y = w(m), hence x = w(m)+conj(w(m)) = 2*Re(w(m)).
CGAL can compute resultants of multivariate polynomials, so you can compute this resultant, and you simply have to pick the correct real root. (The largest one will obviously be w(0) = 1, the smallest one is 2*Re(w(floor(n/2))).)
Unfortunately, the resultant has a high complexity (degree n^2), and resultant computation will not be the fastest operation you've ever seen. Also, you'll pay for dense polynomials although your instances are very sparse and structured. YMMV; I have no clue about your use case, and if you need higher degrees.
However, I did a few tests in a computer algebra system, and I found that the resultant splits into factors of more reasonable size, and that all its real roots actually belong to a much simpler polynomial of degree floor(n/2)+1 only. (No proof, just an observation.)
I don't know of a direct formula to write down this factor, and I don't want to speculate about it. But maybe some people at mathoverflow or math.stackexchange can help?
EDIT: Here is a guess for at least a recursive formula.
I write s(n,x) for the significant factor of the resultant polynomial containing all real roots but 0. This means that s(n,x) has all values 2*Re(w(m)) for m != n/4, 3*n/4 as roots.
s(0,x) = 0
s(1,x) = x - 2
s(2,x) = x^2 - 4
s(3,x) = x^2 - x - 2
s(4,x) = x^2 - 4
s(5,x) = x^3 - x^2 - 3*x + 2
s(6,x) = x^4 - 5*x^2 + 4
s(7,x) = x^4 - x^3 - 4*x^2 + 3*x + 2
s(8,x) = x^4 - 6*x^2 + 8
s(n,x) = (x^2-2)*s(n-4,x) - s(n-8,x)
Waiting for a proof...
I have read about Linear Diophantine equations such as ax+by=c are called diophantine equations and give an integer solution only if gcd(a,b) divides c.
These equations are of great importance in programming contests. I was just searching the Internet, when I came across this problem. I think its a variation of diophantine equations.
Problem :
I have two persons,Person X and Person Y both are standing in the middle of a rope. Person X can jump either A or B units to the left or right in one move. Person Y can jump either C or D units to the left or right in one move. Now, I'm given a number K and I have to find the no. of possible positions on the rope in the range [-K,K] such that both the persons can reach that position using their respective movies any number of times. (A,B,C,D and K are given in question).
My solution:
I think the problem can be solved mathematically using diophantine equations.
I can form an equation for Person X like A x_1 + B y_1 = C_1 where C_1 belongs to [-K,K] and similarly for Person Y like C x_2 + D y_2 = C_2 where C_2 belongs to [-K,K].
Now my search space reduces to just finding the number of possible values for which C_1 and C_2 are same. This will be my answer for this problem.
To find those values I'm just finding gcd(A,B) and gcd(C,D) and then taking the lcm of these two gcd's to get LCM(gcd(A,B),gcd(C,D)) and then simply calculating the number of points in the range [1,K] which are multiples of this lcm.
My final answer will be 2*no_of_multiples in [1,K] + 1.
I tried using the same technique in my C++ code, but it's not working(Wrong Answer).
This is my code :
http://pastebin.com/XURQzymA
My question is: can anyone please tell me if I'm using diophantine equations correctly ?
If yes, can anyone tell me possible cases where my logic fails.
These are some of the test cases which were given on the site with problem statement.
A B C D K are given as input in same sequence and the corresponding output is given on next line :
2 4 3 6 7
3
1 2 4 5 1
3
10 12 3 9 16
5
This is the link to original problem. I have written the original question in simple language. You might find it difficult, but if you want you can check it:
http://www.codechef.com/APRIL12/problems/DUMPLING/
Please give me some test cases so that I can figure out where am I doing wrong ?
Thanks in advance.
Solving Linear Diophantine equations
ax + by = c and gcd(a, b) divides c.
Divide a, b and c by gcd(a,b).
Now gcd(a,b) == 1
Find solution to aU + bV = 1 using Extended Euclidean algorithm
Multiply equation by c. Now you have a(Uc) + b (Vc) = c
You found solution x = U*c and y = V * c
The problem is that the input values are 64-bit (up to 10^18) so the LCM can be up to 128 bits large, therefore l can overflow. Since k is 64-bit, an overflowing l indicates k = 0 (so answer is 1). You need to check this case.
For instance:
unsigned long long l=g1/g; // cannot overflow
unsigned long long res;
if ((l * g2) / g2 != l)
{
// overflow case - l*g2 is very large, so k/(l*g2) is 0
res = 0;
}
else
{
l *= g2;
res = k / l;
}