mersenneforum.org Distribution of matrix nonzeros
 User Name Remember Me? Password
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2010-11-06, 16:12 #1 jasonp Tribal Bullet     Oct 2004 2·29·61 Posts Distribution of matrix nonzeros A few months ago, frmky and I were looking for a new angle on matrix multiplies, and he noticed something peculiar when plotting a histogram of the column counts of nonzeros in the matrix for 2,1036+. You would expect a smooth distribution of light columns that peaks at the matrix average, and then trails off into a smaller number of heavier columns. What we actually see is attached. Why do you think it is that we get 'beats' at the lowest column weights? The matrix average is 81 nonzeros per column; if I had to make up a reason, I would think that the relations that survive the filtering have a bias towards an odd or even number of ideals, and combining a small number of relations into a matrix column magnifies that bias. But it still mystifies me; really I'm worried that the NFS filtering in msieve is actually doing something dumb that I don't know about :) I'm also reminded for some reason of the 'minimax' phenomenon in function approximation, where the approximation with the lowest worst-case error will alternately overshoot and undershoot a true value. Attached Thumbnails   Last fiddled with by jasonp on 2010-11-06 at 16:17
2010-11-08, 13:06   #2
R.D. Silverman

Nov 2003

22×5×373 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by jasonp A few months ago, frmky and I were looking for a new angle on matrix multiplies, and he noticed something peculiar when plotting a histogram of the column counts of nonzeros in the matrix for 2,1036+. You would expect a smooth distribution of light columns that peaks at the matrix average, and then trails off into a smaller number of heavier columns. What we actually see is attached. Why do you think it is that we get 'beats' at the lowest column weights? The matrix average is 81 nonzeros per column; if I had to make up a reason, I would think that the relations that survive the filtering have a bias towards an odd or even number of ideals, and combining a small number of relations into a matrix column magnifies that bias. But it still mystifies me; really I'm worried that the NFS filtering in msieve is actually doing something dumb that I don't know about :) I'm also reminded for some reason of the 'minimax' phenomenon in function approximation, where the approximation with the lowest worst-case error will alternately overshoot and undershoot a true value.

Keep in mind that for the algebraic norms, not every prime is in the
factor base. The algebraic polynomial must have a root mod p.
Some primes are excluded .......

 2010-11-08, 13:34 #3 jasonp Tribal Bullet     Oct 2004 2·29·61 Posts A more pedestrian explanation would be that most relations have about the same number of factors, but only whole relations are merged together to form matrix columns, so it makes sense that there are large numbers of matrix columns with about the same weight, separated by troughs that are 10-15 factors wide :)

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Xyzzy Lounge 13 2017-02-21 18:29 fivemack Factoring 11 2009-08-18 17:39 oslik Factoring 22 2008-11-02 12:53 buan Homework Help 3 2007-07-17 15:07 R.D. Silverman NFSNET Discussion 6 2006-03-19 17:56

All times are UTC. The time now is 18:05.

Tue May 18 18:05:48 UTC 2021 up 40 days, 12:46, 0 users, load averages: 2.41, 2.14, 2.05