Template:Infobox control chart/doc

2011 Acura TSX Sport Wagon-There are just some of us all around who would never drive an suv or a minivan but need something practical for family duties. The Acura TSX is one in all my favorite cars in sedan form but I felt that the wagon deserved special mention for bringing luxury, style, class and driving fun into the family transportation segment.

When my hubby brought this finding to the eye of the Ft. Wayne Indiana Toyota dealer, i was told that they would look into the matter. After wasting 7 days before actually doing everything to change this lease, i was told exercises, diet tips too newer. The salesman never offered us this wonderful deal, and the sales manager told us their dealership gave us the best deal toyota tundra off road they would probably. In the same sentence the sales team leader told us we qualified for the cheaper offer. In all honesty they didn't give us the cheapest price they can have. They gave us the highest lease price we were willing with regard to. My credit score is excellent, but it wouldn't have designed a difference for this dealership. After we had shopped around precisely what you want our lease, we might have definitely got a new better deal.

Now, Certain understand why Toyota doesn't offer the SE with rear seat DVD entertainment since most parents discovered that to be an indispensible feature nowadays. Besides that toyota tundra tuning the 3.5 liter V6 emits a lion-like and throaty roar under heavy acceleration that your call don't expect from a clever minivan. Do note I did not have a chance to drive a car the 2011 Honda Odyssey yet when I had the outcome might happen to different. We'll see this year.

Brian Ickler will make his begin of 2011 in the Kyle Busch Motorsports #18 Dollar General Toyota Tundra at Texas Motor Speedway on Friday, June 10. The WinStar World Casino 400K is being run when partnered with the IZOD IndyCar Series Twin 275s on Saturday, June eleventh.

The level came when he was a college junior. He'd just won the co-angler division for this 1994 Bassmaster Top 100 on Lake Norman. Diet plans . only or even bass tournament he'd ever entered.

16-year-old Erik Jones brought home his second top finish because many races in the absolutely no. 51 SUV for Kyle Busch Motorsports, finishing ninth in Sunday's NC Education Lottery 200 at Rockingham Speedway. Jones started at the tail-end belonging to the field in 36th, dropping a lap early along. The "lucky dog" award put him back with the lead lap, and Jones climbed in the top 10 in morrison a pardon stages belonging to the 200-lap race, which was won by Kyle Larson.

Another disadvantage in the Platinum package continually that it adds more chrome trim with regard to an exterior overburdened with it and forces Toyota to stoop a new low no Japanese truck maker has ever gotten to. Yes, the Tundra Platinum comes standard with chrome wheels. They are as tacky just like the optional Red Rock Leather (that really looks orange) and the cheesy half wood/half leather steering interior.

Then either the CrewMax Limited Platinum Package which pulls out all of the stops with vented and heated seats, wood grain style trim and a sunroof. Three cab sizes can be had - regular, double and CrewMax. The Tundra also has three wheelbase and bed lengths. Quite a few options? Not what this means you can build ultimate truck, get style, performance and practicality and always be able to cover it.Elliptic curve primality testing techniques are among the quickest and most widely used methods in primality proving. It is an idea forwarded by Shafi Goldwasser and Joe Kilian in 1986 and turned into an algorithm by A.O.L. Atkin the same year. The algorithm was altered and improved by several collaborators subsequently, and notably by Atkin and François Morain, in 1993. The concept of using elliptic curves in factorization had been developed by H.W. Lenstra in 1985, and the implications for its use in primality testing (and proving) followed quickly.

Primality testing is a field that has been around since the time of Fermat, in whose time most algorithms were based on factoring, which become unwieldy with large input; modern algorithms treat the problems of determining whether a number is prime and what its factors are separately. It enjoys a great deal of interest with the advent of modern cryptography. Although many current tests result in a probabilistic output (N is either shown composite, or probably prime, such as with the Baillie-PSW primality test or the Miller–Rabin test), the elliptic curve test proves primality (or compositeness) with a quickly verifiable certificate.

Elliptic curve primality proving provides an alternative to (among others) the Pocklington primality test, which can be difficult to implement in practice. Interestingly, the elliptic curve primality tests are based on criteria which is analogous to the Pocklington criterion, on which that test is based, where the group $(\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}{)}^{\ast }$ is replaced by $E(\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z})$, and E is a properly chosen elliptic curve. We will now state a proposition on which to base our test, which is analogous to the Pocklington criterion, and gives rise to the Goldwasser-Kilian-Atkin form of the elliptic curve primality test.

Proposition

Let N be a positive integer, and E be the set which is defined by the equation $y^2=x^3+ax+b(\mathrm{mod}N)$. Consider E over $\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z}$, use the usual addition law on E, and write 0 for the neutral element on E.

Let m be an integer. If there is a prime q which divides m, and is greater than $(N^{1/4}+1{)}^2$ and there exists a point P on E such that

(1) mP = 0

(2) (m/q)P is defined and not equal to 0

Then N is prime.

Proof

If N is composite, then there exists a prime $p\le \sqrt{N}$ that divides N. Define $E_p$ as the elliptic curve defined by the same equation as E but evaluated modulo p rather than modulo N. Define $m_p$ as the order of the group $E_p$. By Hasse's theorem on elliptic curves we know

$m_p\le p+1+2\sqrt{p}=(\sqrt{p}+1{)}^2\le (N^{1/4}+1{)}^2<q$

and thus $gcd(q,m_p)=1$ and there exists an integer u with the property that

$uq\equiv 1(\mathrm{mod}{m}_p)$

Let $P_p$ be the point P evaluated modulo p. Thus, on $E_p$ we have

$(m/q)P_p=uq(m/q)P_p=um{P}_p=0$

by (1), as $m{P}_p$ is calculated using the same method as mP, except modulo p rather than modulo N (and $p|N$).

This contradicts (2), because if (m/q)P is defined and not equal to 0 (mod N), then the same method calculated modulo p instead of modulo N will yield

$(m/q)P_p\ne 0$

Goldwasser–Kilian algorithm

From this proposition an algorithm can be constructed to prove an integer, N, is prime. This is done as follows:

Choose three integers at random, a, x, y and set

$b\equiv y^2-x^3-ax(\mathrm{mod}N)$

Now P = (x,y) is a point on E, where we have that E is defined by $y^2=x^3+ax+b$. Next we need an algorithm to count the number of points on E. Applied to E, this algorithm (Koblitz and others suggest Schoof's algorithm) produces a number m which is the number of points on curve E over F_N, provided N is prime. Next we have a criterion for deciding whether our curve E is acceptable.

If we can write m in the form $m=kq$ where $k\ge 2$ is a small integer and q a probable prime (it has passed some previous probabilistic primality test, for example), then we do not discard E. If it is not possible to write m in this form, we discard our curve and randomly select another triple (a, x, y) to start over.

Assuming we find a curve which passes the criterion, proceed to calculate mP and kP. If at any stage in the calculation we encounter an undefined expression (from calculating the multiples of P or in our point counting algorithm), it gives us a non-trivial factor of N.

If $mP\ne 0$ it is clear that N is not prime, because if N were prime then E would have order m, and any element of E would become 0 on multiplication by m. If kP = 0 then we have hit a dead-end and must start again with a different triple.

Now if $mP=0$ and $kP\ne 0$ then our previous proposition tells us that N is prime. However there is one possible problem, which is the primality of q. This must be verified, using the same algorithm. So we have described a down-run procedure, where the primality of N can be proven through the primality of q and indeed smaller 'probable primes' until we have reached certain primes and are finished.

Problems with the algorithm

Atkin and Morain state "the problem with GK is that Schoof's algorithm seems almost impossible to implement. It is very slow and cumbersome to count all of the points on E using Schoof's algorithm, which is the preferred algorithm for the Goldwasser–Kilian algorithm. However, the original algorithm by Schoof is not efficient enough to provide the number of points in short time. These comments have to be seen in the historical context, before the improvements by Elkies and Atkin to Schoof's method.

A second problem Koblitz notes is the difficulty of finding the curve E whose number of points is of the form kq, as above. There is no known theorem which guarantees we can find a suitable E in polynomially many attempts. The distribution of primes on the Hasse interval $[p+1-2\sqrt{p},p+1+2\sqrt{p}]$, which contains m, is not the same as the distribution of primes in the group orders, counting curves with multiplity. However, this is not a significant problem in practice.

Atkin–Morain elliptic curve primality test (ECPP)

In a 1993 paper, Atkin and Morain described an algorithm ECPP which avoided the trouble of relying on a cumbersome point counting algorithm (Schoof's). The algorithm still relies on the proposition stated above, but rather than randomly generating elliptic curves and searching for a proper m, their idea was to construct a curve E where the number of points is easy to compute. Complex multiplication is key in the construction of the curve.

Now, given an N for which primality needs to be proven we need to find a suitable m and q, just as in the Goldwasser-Kilian test, that will fulfill the proposition and prove the primality of N. (Of course, a point P and the curve itself, E, must also be found.)

ECPP uses complex multiplication to construct the curve E, doing so in a way that allows for m (the number of points on E) to be easily computed. We will now describe this method:

Utilization of complex multiplication requires a negative discriminant, D, such that D can be written as the product of two elements $D=\pi \overline{\pi }$, or completely equivalently, we can write the equation:

$a^2+|D|b^2=4N$

For some a, b. If we can describe N in terms of either of these forms, we can create an elliptic curve E on $\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z}$ with complex multiplication (described in detail below), and the number of points is given by:

$|E(\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z})|=N+1-\pi -\overline{\pi }=N+1-a.$

For N to split into two the two elements, we need that $\left(\frac{D}{N}\right)=1$ (where $\left(\frac{D}{N}\right)$ denotes the Legendre symbol). This is a necessary condition, and we achieve sufficiency if the class number h(D) of the order in $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{D})$ is 1. This happens for only 13 values of D, which are the elements of {−3, −4, −7, −8, −11, −12, −16, −19, −27, −28, −43, −67, −163}

The test

Pick discriminants D in sequence of increasing h(D). For each D check if $\left(\frac{D}{N}\right)=1$ and whether 4N can be written as:

$a^2+|D|b^2=4N$

This part can be verified using Cornacchia's algorithm. Once acceptable D and a have been discovered, calculate $m=N+1-a$. Now if m has a prime factor q of size

$q>(N^{1/4}+1{)}^2$

use the complex multiplication method to construct the curve E and a point P on it. Then we can use our proposition to verify the primality of N. Note that if m does not have a large prime factor or cannot be factored quickly enough, another choice of D can be made.

Complex multiplication method

For completeness, we will provide an overview of complex multiplication, the way in which an elliptic curve can be created, given our D (which can be written as a product of two elements).

Assume first that $D\ne -3$ and $D\ne -4$ (these cases are much more easily done). It is necessary to calculate the elliptic j-invariants of the h(D) classes of the order of discriminant D as complex numbers. There are several formulas to calculate these.

Next create the monic polynomial $H_D(X)$, which has roots corresponding to the h(D) values. Note, that $H_D(X)$ is the class polynomial. From complex multiplication theory, we know that $H_D(X)$ has integer coefficients, which allows us to estimate these coefficients accurately enough to discover their true values.

Now, if N is prime, CM tells us that $H_D(X)$ splits modulo N into a product of h(D) linear factors, based on the fact that D was chosen so that N splits as the product of two elements. Now if j is one of the h(D) roots modulo N we can define E as:

$y^2=x^3-3k{c}^{2r}x+2k{c}^{3r},\text{ where }k=\frac{j}{j-1728},$

c is any quadratic nonresidue mod N, and r is either 0 or 1.

Given a root j there are only two possible nonisomorphic choices of E, one for each choice of r. We have the cardinality of these curves as

$|E(\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z})|=N+1-a$ or $|E(\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z})|=N+1+a$

Discussion

Just as with the Goldwasser–Killian test, this one leads to a down-run procedure. Again, the culprit is q. Once we find a q that works, we must check it to be prime, so in fact we are doing the whole test now for q. Then again we may have to perform the test for factors of q. This leads to a nested certificate where at each level we have an elliptic curve E, an m and the prime in doubt, q.

Example of Atkin–Morain ECPP

We construct an example to prove that $N=167$ is prime using the Atkin–Morain ECPP test. First proceed through the set of 13 possible discriminants, testing whether the Legendre Symbol $(D/N)=1$, and if 4N can be written as $4N=a^2+|D|b^2$.

For our example D = −43 is chosen. This is because $(D/N)=(-43/167)=1$ and also, using Cornacchia's algorithm, we know that $4\cdot (167)=25^2+(43)(1^2)$ and thus a = 25 and b = 1.

The next step is to calculate m. This is easily done as $m=N+1-a$ which yields $m=167+1-25=143$. Next we need to find a probable prime divisor of m, which was referred to as q. It must satisfy the condition that $q>(N^{1/4}+1{)}^2$

Now in this case, m = 143 = 11*13. So unfortunately we cannot choose 11 or 13 as our q, for it does not satisfy the necessary inequality. We are saved, however, by an analogous proposition to that which we stated before the Goldwasser–Kilian algorithm, which comes from a paper by Morain. It states, that given our m, we look for an s which divides m, $s>(N^{1/4}+1{)}^2$, but is not necessarily prime, and check whether, for each $p_i$ which divides s

$m/p_{i}P\ne P_{\mathrm{\infty }}$

for some point P on our yet to be constructed curve.

If s satisfies the inequality, and its prime factors satisfy the above, then N is prime.

So in our case, we choose s = m = 143. Thus our possible $p_i$'s are 11 and 13. First, it is clear that $143>(167^{1/4}+1{)}^2$, and so we need only check the values of

$(143/11)P=13P\text{ and }(143/13)P=11P.$

But before we can do this, we must construct our curve, and choose a point P. In order to construct the curve, we make use of complex multiplication. In our case we compute the J-invariant

$j\equiv -960^3(\mathrm{mod}167)\equiv 107(\mathrm{mod}167).$

Next we compute $k=\frac{j}{1728-j}(\mathrm{mod}167)\equiv 158(\mathrm{mod}167)$ and we know our elliptic curve is of the form:

$y^2=x^3+3k{c}^{2}x+2k{c}^3$,

where k is as described previously and c a non-square in ${𝔽}_{167}$. So we can begin with

$r=0,3k\equiv 140(\mathrm{mod}167)$, $2k\equiv 149(\mathrm{mod}167)$ which yields

E: $y^2=x^3+140x+149(\mathrm{mod}167)$

Now, utilizing the point P = (6,6) on E it can be verified that 143P = $P_{\mathrm{\infty }}$.

It is simple to check that 13(6, 6) = (12, 65) and 11P = (140, 147), and so, by Morain's proposition, N is prime.

Complexity and running times

Goldwasser and Kilian's elliptic curve primality proving algorithm terminates in expected polynomial time for at least

$1-O\left(2^{-N\frac{1}{\log \log n}}\right)$

of prime inputs.

Conjecture

Let $\pi (x)$ be the number of primes smaller than x

$\mathrm{\exists }{c}_1,c_2>0:\pi (x+\sqrt{x})-\pi (x)\ge \frac{c_2\sqrt{x}}{{\log }^{c_1}x}$

for sufficiently large x.

If one accepts this conjecture then the Goldwasser–Kilian algorithm terminates in expected polynomial time for every input. Also, if our N is of length k, then the algorithm creates a certificate of size $O(k^2)$ that can be verified in $O(k^4)$.

Now consider another conjecture, which will give us a bound on the total time of the algorithm.

Conjecture 2

Suppose there exist positive constants $c_1$ and $c_2$ such that the amount of primes in the interval

$[x,x+\sqrt{2x}],x\ge 2$ is larger than $c_1\sqrt{x}(\log x{)}^{-c_2}$

Then the Goldwasser Kilian algorithm proves the primality of N in an expected time of

$O({\log }^{10+c_2}n)$

For the Atkin–Morain algorithm, the running time stated is

$O((\log N{)}^{6+ϵ})$ for some $ϵ>0$

Primes of special form

For some forms of numbers, it is possible to find 'short-cuts' to a primality proof. This is the case for the Mersenne numbers. In fact, due to their special structure, which allows for easier verification of primality, the largest known prime number is a Mersenne number. There has been a method in use for some time to verify primality of Mersenne numbers, known as the Lucas–Lehmer test. This test does not rely on elliptic curves. However we present a result where numbers of the form $N=2^{k}n-1$ where $k,n\in \mathbb{Z},k\ge 2$, n odd can be proven prime (or composite) using elliptic curves. Of course this will also provide a method for proving primality of Mersenne numbers, which correspond to the case where n = 1. It should be noted that there is a method in place for testing this form of number without elliptic curves (with a limitation on the size of k) known as the Lucas–Lehmer–Riesel test. The following method is drawn from the paper Primality Test for $2^{k}n-1$ using Elliptic Curves, by Yu Tsumura.

Group structure of E(F_N)

We take E as our elliptic curve, where E is of the form $y^2=x^3-mx$ for $m\in \mathbb{Z}$, $m\equiv 0(\mathrm{mod}p)$, where $p\equiv 3(\mathrm{mod}4)$ is prime, and $p+1=2^{k}n,k\in \mathbb{Z},k\ge 2,n$ odd.

Theorem 1

#E$({𝔽}_p)=p+1$

Theorem 2

E$({𝔽}_p)\cong {\mathbb{Z}}_{2^{k}n}$ or

E$({𝔽}_p)\cong {\mathbb{Z}}_2\oplus {\mathbb{Z}}_{2^{k-1}n}$

Depending on whether or not m is a quadratic residue modulo p.

Theorem 3

Let $p\equiv 3(\mathrm{mod}4)$ be prime, E, k, n, m as above. Take Q = (x,y) on E, x a quadratic nonresidue modulo p.

Then the order of Q is divisible by $2^k$ in the cyclic group $E({𝔽}_p)\cong {\mathbb{Z}}_{2^{k}n}$.

First we will present the case where n is relatively small with respect to $2^k$, and this will require one more theorem.

Theorem 4

Choose a $\lambda >1$. E, k, n, m are specified as above with the added restrictions that

$n\le \sqrt{p}/\lambda$ and $\lambda \sqrt{p}>(p^{1/4}+1{)}^2$

p is a prime if and only if there exists a Q = (x,y) which is on E, such that the

$gcd(S_i,p)=1$ for i = 1, 2, ...,k − 1 and $S_k\equiv 0(\mathrm{mod}p)$

where $S_i$ is a sequence with initial value $S_0=x$

The algorithm

We provide the following algorithm, which relies mainly on Theorems 3 and 4. To verify the primality of a given number N, perform the following steps:

(1) Chose $x\in \mathbb{Z}$ such that $(\frac{x}{N})=-1$, and find y such that $(\frac{x^3-y^2}{N})=1$

Take $m=\frac{x^3-y^2}{x}(\mathrm{mod}N)$

Then Q' = (x,y) is on E: $y^2=x^3-mx$ where $m\equiv 0(\mathrm{mod}N)$

Calculate Q = mQ'. If $Q=P_{\mathrm{\infty }}$ then N is composite, otherwise proceed to (2).

(2) Set $S_i$ as the sequence with initial value Q. Calculate $S_i$ for i = 1,2,..., k − 1

If $gcd(S_i,N)>1$ for an i, where $1\le i\le k-1$ then N is composite. Otherwise, proceed to (3).

(3) If $S_k\equiv 0(\mathrm{mod}N)$ then N is prime. Otherwise, N is composite. This completes the test.

Justification of the algorithm

In (1), and elliptic curve, E is picked, along with a point Q on E, such that the x-coordinate of Q is a quadratic nonresidue. We can say

$\left(\frac{m}{N}\right)=\left(\frac{\frac{x^3-y^2}{x}}{N}\right)=\left(\frac{x}{N}\right)\left(\frac{x^3-y^2}{N}\right)=-1\cdot 1=-1.$

Thus, if N is prime, Q' has order divisible by $2^k$, by Theorem 3,
and therefore the order of Q' is $2^{k}d$ d | n.

This means Q = nQ' has order $2^k$. Therefore, if (1) concludes that N is composite, it truly is composite. (2) and (3) check if Q has order $2^k$. Thus, if (2) or (3) conclude N is composite, it is composite.

Now, if the algorithm concludes that N is prime, then that means $S_1$ satisfies the condition of Theorem 4, and so N is truly prime.

There is an algorithm as well for when n is large, however for this we refer to the aforementioned article.

References

43 year old Petroleum Engineer Harry from Deep River, usually spends time with hobbies and interests like renting movies, property developers in singapore new condominium and vehicle racing. Constantly enjoys going to destinations like Camino Real de Tierra Adentro. Template:Number-theoretic algorithms