Re: JSH: I'm depressed

[W. Dale Hall]
...
Finally, your "hyperbolic factoring method" doesn't apparently
work any better than brute force.

AFAIK, nobody has tried it. It was posted only to sci.crypt, and James was
unable to provoke any serious replies (either then or in a later followup):

From: jstevh@xxxxxxx
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Surrogate factoring, corrected equations
Date: 10 Apr 2006 19:03:50 -0700
Message-ID: <1144721030.577577.259860@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

I suppose a thoroughly safe statement would be that nobody knows for sure
how it might work.

However, if you're a betting man, note that it's another pile of equations
over the complex numbers that has nothing in it to force integral results.
"Been there, done that" was my gut response, and it's such an unpromising &
unmotivated mess I have no interest in trying it. Unless it's fundamentally
better than all previous SF variations, "works worse than random-gcd" would
be the outcome, where "random-gcd" is this algorithm, given a composite T to
be factored:

repeat {
i := an integer chosen uniformly at random from [2, T)
g := gcd(i, T)
} until 1 < g < T
report that g is a non-trivial factor of T

I see no reason to suspect the April 10 variation might do better, although
I have indeed not tried it.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Controls auf Panel zur Laufzeit verschieben
    ... Ich stelle auf einem Panel eigene UserControls dar und möchte diese zur ... Code Sample That Demonstrates How to Create a Custom Form Designer ...
    (microsoft.public.de.german.entwickler.dotnet.csharp)
  • Re: Surrogate Factoring Solution
    ... predictions for were consistently overestimatinghow long it would be ... > a large enough number of N_i to give a good chance of factoring ... > variation on the same basic algorithm it was not much of a stretch ... So that one was demonstrably better than random-gcd in terms of # of gcds ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Surrogate Factoring Solution
    ... predictions for were consistently overestimatinghow long it would be ... > a large enough number of N_i to give a good chance of factoring ... > variation on the same basic algorithm it was not much of a stretch ... So that one was demonstrably better than random-gcd in terms of # of gcds ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Factoring integers on a classical computer
    ... There are no practical methods out there that beat ... > It is false because your statement seemed to imply that FACTORING is ... > EXPTIME. ... > Now, your argument seems to say that "for factoring, brute force is ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: Factoring integers on a classical computer
    ... There are no practical methods out there that beat ... > It is false because your statement seemed to imply that FACTORING is ... > EXPTIME. ... > Now, your argument seems to say that "for factoring, brute force is ...
    (sci.math)