Smoothness test - Page 2

Wacky · 2005-06-27, 11:55

Bob,
Thanks for the correction. Perhaps the moderator of this forum will allow us to edit my earlier posting so as to avoid the misinformation. The NFS is sufficiently mind-warping without my addition of incorrect terminology.

Would "norms in a field derived from the sieving polynomial" be correct?

Richard

R.D. Silverman · 2005-06-27, 12:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wacky

Bob,
Thanks for the correction. Perhaps the moderator of this forum will allow us to edit my earlier posting so as to avoid the misinformation. The NFS is sufficiently mind-warping without my addition of incorrect terminology.

Would "norms in a field derived from the sieving polynomial" be correct?

Richard

It's good enough. although I would say "norms of elements of a field", rather
than "norms in a field".

2005-06-27, 11:55	#12
Wacky Jun 2003 The Texas Hill Country 3²·11² Posts	Bob, Thanks for the correction. Perhaps the moderator of this forum will allow us to edit my earlier posting so as to avoid the misinformation. The NFS is sufficiently mind-warping without my addition of incorrect terminology. Would "norms in a field derived from the sieving polynomial" be correct? Richard Last fiddled with by Wacky on 2005-06-27 at 12:01

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Modifying the Lucas Lehmer Primality Test into a fast test of nothing	Trilo	Miscellaneous Math	25	2018-03-11 23:20
Inverse of Smoothness Probability	paul0	Math	6	2017-07-25 16:41
Quick smoothness test	Sam Kennedy	Programming	18	2013-01-21 14:23
Double check LL test faster than first run test	lidocorc	Software	3	2008-12-03 15:12
A primality test for Fermat numbers faster than Pépin's test ?	T.Rex	Math	0	2004-10-26 21:37