| Bill Allombert on Tue, 28 Mar 2023 16:03:02 +0200 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| Re: finite fields -- choice of defining polynomial |
On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 02:14:44PM +0100, John Cremona wrote: > Thanks, Bill. > > The reason we want to use Conway polynomials is that they are primitive > (the root generates the multiplicative group), and also, crucially, that > these roots form a coherent system of all roots of unity of prime-to-ell > order in the algebraic closure of F_ell. > > I do know that there is no known way to compute them, so that using > precomputed lists (for some small values of ell and d) is desirable. But I > bet that a list of all known Conway polynomials would take up less space as > an optional package than my database of ellipticcurves of conductor up to > 500000! ( I did not check this reckless claim...) > > Still, I am glad that ffinit() is deterministic so will not change. On the other hand, unfortunately ffprimroot is randomized, so the following minpoly(ffprimroot(ffgen([p,n]))) (which returns a primitive polynomial) is not deterministic. However computing primitive polynomials is much more expensive than ffinit since it requires to factor p^n-1. (Magma also have tables of such factorizations). Cheers, Bill.