DOCSLIB.ORG

Computational Problems of Quadratic Forms: Complexity and Cryptographic Perspectives

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Computational Problems of Quadratic Forms: Complexity and Cryptographic Perspectives Computational Problems of Quadratic Forms: Complexity and Cryptographic Perspectives Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades der Naturwissenschaften vorgelegt beim Fachbereich Informatik und Mathematik der Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universit¨at in Frankfurt am Main von Rupert Hartung aus Oberwesel Frankfurt am Main, 2007 Contents Introduction vii Table of Notation xvii I Quadratic Forms and their Applications 1 1 Preliminaries 3 1.1 Computational Problems . 3 1.1.1 Model of computation . 3 1.1.2 Problems . 4 1.1.3 Probabilistic Computation . 5 1.1.4 Reductions . 5 1.2 Quadratic Forms . 6 1.2.1 Quadratic Forms . 6 1.2.2 Representations . 8 1.2.3 Properties of forms . 9 1.2.4 Transformations . 9 1.2.5 Class structure over Important Rings . 12 1.2.6 Classes and Genera . 19 1.2.7 Reduction . 21 1.3 Problems of Quadratic Forms . 21 1.3.1 Rings . 21 1.3.2 Encoding of properties . 23 1.3.3 Representation problem . 24 1.3.4 Transformation problem . 26 1.3.5 Primitiveness . 26 1.3.6 Complexity assumption . 27 2 Cryptography 29 2.1 Randomization and Key Generation . 29 2.2 An identification scheme . 31 2.2.1 Specification of the Protocol . 31 2.2.2 Proof of knowledge . 32 2.2.3 Zero-knowledge property . 34 2.3 Long Challenges and Signatures . 35 2.3.1 Specification of the protocol . 35 2.3.2 Application to digital signatures . 35 iii iv CONTENTS 2.3.3 Security against Fraudulent Provers . 36 2.3.4 Security against Fraudulent Verifiers . 37 3 Localization and Decisional Complexity 39 3.1 Decision Problems . 39 3.2 Forms over Finite Fields . 45 3.3 Forms over Local Rings . 47 4 Algorithms for Primes, Classes, and Genera 53 4.1 Algorithmic Prime Selection . 53 4.2 Construction of Genera . 59 4.2.1 Local representations . 59 4.2.2 Composition of square classes . 62 4.2.3 Approximation . 65 4.2.4 Main algorithm . 68 II Classification with Respect to Complexity 73 5 Cases of Low Complexity 75 5.1 Singular Forms . 75 5.2 Reducible Forms . 78 5.3 Definite Forms . 82 5.4 Isotropic Ternary Forms . 83 6 The Impact of the Base Ring on Complexity 87 6.1 Forms over the Rational Numbers . 87 6.2 Rings of Formal Power Series . 90 6.2.1 Introduction and summary of results . 90 6.2.2 Upper bounds . 91 6.2.3 Lower bounds for representations . 93 6.3 Polynomial Rings . 96 7 Complexity for Varying Dimension 101 7.1 Dimension Shift to Ternary and Quaternary Forms . 101 7.1.1 Introduction and result . 101 7.1.2 Direct sum decomposition of isotropic forms . 102 7.1.3 Conclusion of the proof . 103 7.2 Binary Forms . 103 III Hardness and Interrelationship 107 8 Comparison with Factorization 109 8.1 Introduction and Result . 109 8.2 Spinor Norm and an Equivalence Criterion . 110 8.3 Conclusion of the Proof . 112 8.4 Problem Modification . 114 CONTENTS v 9 NP-Hardness Results 115 9.1 Introduction and Summary of Results . 115 9.2 From SAT to Squares . 121 9.3 The Special Cohen-Lenstra Heuristics . 127 9.4 The Image of Binary Forms . 130 9.5 The One-Class Condition . 131 9.6 Orbits of Representations . 132 9.7 Conclusion of the Proofs . 140 10 Relationship between the Problems 145 10.1 Result and Proof Outline . 145 10.2 Construction of a Represented Form . 147 10.3 Construction of an Equivalent Form . 149 10.4 Reduction to Representations . 151 vi CONTENTS Introduction I am the very model of a modern Major-General, I’ve information vegetable, animal, and mineral, [...] I’m very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical, I understand equations, both the simple and quadratical [...]. (W. S. Gilbert, from: The Pirates of Penzance) At least at first sight, quadratic equations seem to be much more difficult than linear problems. This is what W. S. Gilbert may have had in mind when writing this verse for this self-assure officer; or so the juxtaposition between ‘simple’ and ‘quadratical’ equations suggests. Roughly speaking, the aim of this dissertation is to answer the question, how difficult the latter are. Background. Quadratic forms play an important role in number theory as well as in several related areas. They already aroused the interest of Fermat, Euler, Lagrange, and Legendre (see [Wei84], [Dic34b, ch. VI–X, XII, XIII], [Dic34c, ch. I–XI]). Perhaps one of their main appeals is their seeming simplicity: Being merely a slight abstraction from quadratic equations, quadratic forms are easy to write down and ask questions about. More specifically, quadratic forms are just one step beyond linear ones, and the theory of linear forms (i. e. linear algebra by any other name) is thouroughly explored and easily understandible – at least from today’s perspective. Curiously, this picture changes radically when turning to exponent two. Another reason to study quadratic forms lies in the fact that binary forms bear the structural information on quadratic number fields, but in an easier accessible way. The mathematical literature produced by the mid of the 19th century has not only contributed singnificantly to the knowledge about quadratic forms, but also raised new questions. Especially Gauß’ work Disquisitiones Arithmeticae [Gau89] enjoyed immense popularity among the mathematicians of his and the following generations: Not only did it mean a leap ahead in the theory, but it has also shaped much of the area today known as algebraic number theory. Probably, the flourishing of this reasearch area inspired Hilbert to discuss it in his famous speech at the International Congress of Mathematicians in Paris in 1900. The eleventh item on his famous list of mathematical problems for the 20th century calls for a theory of quadratic forms over algebraic number fields. vii viii INTRODUCTION The efforts initiated by Hilbert’s speech have given rise to the arithmetic theory of quadratic forms, which explores quadratic forms over local and global fields and their respective rings of integers. Many question could be settled in this area. The honor of having accomplished Hilbert’s task is usually granted to H. Hasse for the famous Hasse Principle (see [Has24]). It is this branch of the theory which will prove the most significant here. Some central results are discussed in Sect. 1.2.5. Despite these enormous advances, algorithmic questions have hardly ever come into focus. This is even more suprising in view of the fact that most of the theory starts with two classical decision problems: (A) Given two quadratic forms, are they equivalent? (B) Given a quadratic form and a scalar, can the scalar be repre- sented by the form? More than a century of research has provided us with comprehensive crite- ria for these questions. However, the algorithmic nature of such results is often barely a theoretical possibility. This point deserves a closer look. In the lan- guage of computer science, the arithmetic theory can only prove that questions (A), (B) are decidable, while making no statement about running times. Are these problems possibly polynomial-time decidable? In many important special cases, the answer is ‘yes’, still thanks to arithmetic results, see Sect. 3.1. How- ever, these results do not extend to all forms. This gap is due to the complexity of the underlying computational problems: (A’) Given two equivalent forms, compute an equivalence transform. (B’) Given a form f and a scalar m, solve the equation f(v) = m (if possible). An efficent method which produces an equivalence transform or representa- tion if it exists, obviously yields a procedure to decide their existence. But here it seems that the only algorithm considered in the literature to find a transfor- mation is exhaustive search. This is most obvious when the attempt of Dickson and Ross to decide equivalence of a particular pair of forms is discussed (see [Cas78, p. 132], [CS93, p. 403]). The restriction to trivial algorithms also be- comes explicit in Siegel’s famous bound on equivalence transformations [Sie72], which reproves the decidability of (A) using analytic techniques. More precisely, he shows that for each pairs f, g of equivalent forms there is a constant C > 0 effectively computable from f, g such that there is a transformation from f to g whose coefficients are absolutely bounded by C. Siegel explicitly refers to the enumeration of all integral matrices up to some bound on the coefficients for testing equivalence. In dimension three, Siegel’s implicit bound has been made explicit and has been improved to polynomial size by Dietmann [Die03]. Still using trivial enu- meration, this implies that problem (A) is in NP. Moreover, for problem (B), ix Grunewald and Segal [GS04] showed decidability by solving problem (B’) if possible. Their algorithm is more sophisticated, yet still involves steps of expo- nential enumeration. I am aware of exactly one literature reference asking explicitly for a com- plexity analysis of problems (A), (B), (A’), (B’). At the end of [CS93, ch. 15], Conway and Sloane formulate both decisional and computational equivalence and representation problems, along with a couple of additional questions, e. g. on class numbers. They mention several cases for which these problems are easy. For indefinite forms over Z, they express their impression that “there do not seem to be good algorithms”, and discuss the inefficiency of exhaustive enumeration. Thus it may be stated that algorithms on quadratic forms have hardly been studied, and even less so complexity issues. Out of fairness, we ought to mention the main exceptions to this rule. In [Gau89], Gauß solves all problems (A),(B),(A’),(B’) for binary integral forms giving concrete non-trivial algorithms along with a correctness analysis (see also [Lag80], [BB97], [BV07] for improvements).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Minimal Weakly Isotropic Forms
    Minimal weakly isotropic forms Karim Johannes Becher Abstract In this article weakly isotropic quadratic forms over a (formally) real field are studied. Conditions on the field are given which imply that every weakly isotropic form over that field has a weakly isotropic sub- form of small dimension. Fields over which every quadratic form can be decomposed into an orthogonal sum of a strongly anisotropic form and a torsion form are characterized in different ways. Keywords: quadratic form, weakly isotropic, strongly anisotropic, real field, Pythagoras number, field invariants, SAP-field, local-global principle Classification (MSC 2000): 11E04, 11E81, 12D15 1 Introduction The concept of weak isotropy was introduced by Prestel in [11] and studied in the 1970ies, especially by Prestel and Br¨ocker. The main motivation for this concept is the failure of any kind of local-global principle for isotropy of quadratic forms in a general situation. It turned out that, over any (formally) real field, weakly isotropic forms can be characterized, on the one hand in terms of the semi-orderings (cf. [11]), on the other hand in terms of the real places of the field (cf. [11], [2]). Applications of weakly isotropic forms occur in real algebra and geometry (cf. [13]). The present article investigates weakly isotropic forms in view of the question what kind of subforms and orthogonal decompositions they admit. This leads to consider in particular those weakly isotropic forms which are minimal in the sense that they do not contain any proper subform which is weakly isotropic. The question of how large the dimension of such a form may be gives rise to a new field invariant.
    [Show full text]
  • Differential Forms, Linked Fields and the $ U $-Invariant
    Differential Forms, Linked Fields and the u-Invariant Adam Chapman Department of Computer Science, Tel-Hai Academic College, Upper Galilee, 12208 Israel Andrew Dolphin Department of Mathematics, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium Abstract We associate an Albert form to any pair of cyclic algebras of prime degree p over a field F with char(F) = p which coincides with the classical Albert form when p = 2. We prove that if every Albert form is isotropic then H4(F) = 0. As a result, we obtain that if F is a linked field with char(F) = 2 then its u-invariant is either 0, 2, 4or 8. Keywords: Differential Forms, Quadratic Forms, Linked Fields, u-Invariant, Fields of Finite Characteristic. 2010 MSC: 11E81 (primary); 11E04, 16K20 (secondary) 1. Introduction Given a field F, a quaternion algebra over F is a central simple F-algebra of degree 2. The maximal subfields of quaternion division algebras over F are quadratic field extensions of F. When char(F) , 2, all quadratic field extensions are separable. When char(F) = 2, there are two types of quadratic field extensions: the separable type which is of the form F[x : x2 + x = α] for some α F λ2 + λ : λ F , and the ∈ \ { 2 ∈ } inseparable type which is of the form F[ √α] for some α F× (F×) . In this case, any quaternion division algebra contains both types of field ext∈ ensions,\ which can be seen by its symbol presentation 2 2 1 [α, β)2,F = F x, y : x + x = α, y = β, yxy− = x + 1 . arXiv:1701.01367v2 [math.RA] 22 May 2017 h i If char(F) = p for some prime p > 0, we let ℘(F) denote the additive subgroup λp λ : λ F .
    [Show full text]
  • Computational Complexity Theory Introduction to Computational
    31/03/2012 Computational complexity theory Introduction to computational complexity theory Complexity (computability) theory theory deals with two aspects: Algorithm’s complexity. Problem’s complexity. References S. Cook, « The complexity of Theorem Proving Procedures », 1971. Garey and Johnson, « Computers and Intractability, A guide to the theory of NP-completeness », 1979. J. Carlier et Ph. Chrétienne « Problèmes d’ordonnancements : algorithmes et complexité », 1988. 1 31/03/2012 Basic Notions • Some problem is a “question” characterized by parameters and needs an answer. – Parameters description; – Properties that a solutions must satisfy; – An instance is obtained when the parameters are fixed to some values. • An algorithm: a set of instructions describing how some task can be achieved or a problem can be solved. • A program : the computational implementation of an algorithm. Algorithm’s complexity (I) • There may exists several algorithms for the same problem • Raised questions: – Which one to choose ? – How they are compared ? – How measuring the efficiency ? – What are the most appropriate measures, running time, memory space ? 2 31/03/2012 Algorithm’s complexity (II) • Running time depends on: – The data of the problem, – Quality of program..., – Computer type, – Algorithm’s efficiency, – etc. • Proceed by analyzing the algorithm: – Search for some n characterizing the data. – Compute the running time in terms of n. – Evaluating the number of elementary operations, (elementary operation = simple instruction of a programming language). Algorithm’s evaluation (I) • Any algorithm is composed of two main stages: initialization and computing one • The complexity parameter is the size data n (binary coding). Definition: Let be n>0 andT(n) the running time of an algorithm expressed in terms of the size data n, T(n) is of O(f(n)) iff n0 and some constant c such that: n n0, we have T(n) c f(n).
    [Show full text]
  • Submitted Thesis
    Saarland University Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science Bachelor’s Thesis Synthetic One-One, Many-One, and Truth-Table Reducibility in Coq Author Advisor Felix Jahn Yannick Forster Reviewers Prof. Dr. Gert Smolka Prof. Dr. Markus Bläser Submitted: September 15th, 2020 ii Eidesstattliche Erklärung Ich erkläre hiermit an Eides statt, dass ich die vorliegende Arbeit selbstständig ver- fasst und keine anderen als die angegebenen Quellen und Hilfsmittel verwendet habe. Statement in Lieu of an Oath I hereby confirm that I have written this thesis on my own and that I have not used any other media or materials than the ones referred to in this thesis. Einverständniserklärung Ich bin damit einverstanden, dass meine (bestandene) Arbeit in beiden Versionen in die Bibliothek der Informatik aufgenommen und damit veröffentlicht wird. Declaration of Consent I agree to make both versions of my thesis (with a passing grade) accessible to the public by having them added to the library of the Computer Science Department. Saarbrücken, September 15th, 2020 Abstract Reducibility is an essential concept for undecidability proofs in computability the- ory. The idea behind reductions was conceived by Turing, who introduced the later so-called Turing reduction based on oracle machines. In 1944, Post furthermore in- troduced with one-one, many-one, and truth-table reductions in comparison to Tur- ing reductions more specific reducibility notions. Post then also started to analyze the structure of the different reducibility notions and their computability degrees. Most undecidable problems were reducible from the halting problem, since this was exactly the method to show them undecidable. However, Post was able to con- struct also semidecidable but undecidable sets that do not one-one, many-one, or truth-table reduce from the halting problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Module 34: Reductions and NP-Complete Proofs
    Module 34: Reductions and NP-Complete Proofs This module 34 focuses on reductions and proof of NP-Complete problems. The module illustrates the ways of reducing one problem to another. Then, the module illustrates the outlines of proof of NP- Complete problems with some examples. The objectives of this module are To understand the concept of Reductions among problems To Understand proof of NP-Complete problems To overview proof of some Important NP-Complete problems. Computational Complexity There are two types of complexity theories. One is related to algorithms, known as algorithmic complexity theory and another related to complexity of problems called computational complexity theory [2,3]. Algorithmic complexity theory [3,4] aims to analyze the algorithms in terms of the size of the problem. In modules 3 and 4, we had discussed about these methods. The size is the length of the input. It can be recollected from module 3 that the size of a number n is defined to be the number of binary bits needed to write n. For example, Example: b(5) = b(1012) = 3. In other words, the complexity of the algorithm is stated in terms of the size of the algorithm. Asymptotic Analysis [1,2] refers to the study of an algorithm as the input size reaches a limit and analyzing the behaviour of the algorithms. The asymptotic analysis is also science of approximation where the behaviour of the algorithm is expressed in terms of notations such as big-oh, Big-Omega and Big- Theta. Computational complexity theory is different. Computational complexity aims to determine complexity of the problems itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Background
    Chapter 0 Historical Background The theory of composition of quadratic forms over fields had its start in the 19th century with the search for n-square identities of the type 2 + 2 +···+ 2 · 2 + 2 +···+ 2 = 2 + 2 +···+ 2 (x1 x2 xn) (y1 y2 yn) z1 z2 zn where X = (x1,x2,...,xn) and Y = (y1,y2,...,yn) are systems of indeterminates and each zk = zk(X, Y ) is a bilinear form in X and Y . For example when n = 2 there is the ancient identity 2 + 2 · 2 + 2 = + 2 + − 2 (x1 x2 ) (y1 y2 ) (x1y1 x2y2) (x1y2 x2y1) . In this example z1 = x1y1 + x2y2 and z2 = x1y2 − x2y1 are bilinear forms in X, Y with integer coefficients. This formula for n = 2 can be interpreted as the “law of moduli” for complex numbers: |α|·|β|=|αβ| where α = x1 −ix2 and β = y1 +iy2. A similar 4-square identity was found by Euler (1748) in his attempt to prove Fermat’s conjecture that every positive integer is a sum of four integer squares. This identity is often attributed to Lagrange, who used it (1770) in his proof of that conjec- ture of Fermat. Here is Euler’s formula, in our notation: 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 · 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 = 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 (x1 x2 x3 x4 ) (y1 y2 y3 y4 ) z1 z2 z3 z4 where z1 = x1y1 + x2y2 + x3y3 + x4y4 z2 = x1y2 − x2y1 + x3y4 − x4y3 z3 = x1y3 − x2y4 − x3y1 + x4y2 z4 = x1y4 + x2y3 − x3y2 − x4y1. After Hamilton’s discovery of the quaternions (1843) this 4-square formula was interpreted as the law of moduli for quaternions.
    [Show full text]
  • Decidable. (Recall It’S Not “Regular”.)
    15-251: Great Theoretical Ideas in Computer Science Fall 2016 Lecture 6 September 15, 2016 Turing & the Uncomputable Comparing the cardinality of sets 퐴 ≤ 퐵 if there is an injection (one-to-one map) from 퐴 to 퐵 퐴 ≥ 퐵 if there is a surjection (onto map) from 퐴 to 퐵 퐴 = 퐵 if there is a bijection from 퐴 to 퐵 퐴 > |퐵| if there is no surjection from 퐵 to 퐴 (or equivalently, there is no injection from 퐴 to 퐵) Countable and uncountable sets countable countably infinite uncountable One slide guide to countability questions You are given a set 퐴 : is it countable or uncountable 퐴 ≤ |ℕ| or 퐴 > |ℕ| 퐴 ≤ |ℕ| : • Show directly surjection from ℕ to 퐴 • Show that 퐴 ≤ |퐵| where 퐵 ∈ {ℤ, ℤ x ℤ, ℚ, Σ∗, ℚ[x], …} 퐴 > |ℕ| : • Show directly using a diagonalization argument • Show that 퐴 ≥ | 0,1 ∞| Proving sets countable using computation For example, f(n) = ‘the nth prime’. You could write a program (Turing machine) to compute f. So this is a well-defined rule. Or: f(n) = the nth rational in our listing of ℚ. (List ℤ2 via the spiral, omit the terms p/0, omit rationals seen before…) You could write a program to compute this f. Poll Let 퐴 be the set of all languages over Σ = 1 ∗ Select the correct ones: - A is finite - A is infinite - A is countable - A is uncountable Another thing to remember from last week Encoding different objects with strings Fix some alphabet Σ . We use the ⋅ notation to denote the encoding of an object as a string in Σ∗ Examples: is the encoding a TM 푀 is the encoding a DFA 퐷 is the encoding of a pair of TMs 푀1, 푀2 is the encoding a pair 푀, 푥, where 푀 is a TM, and 푥 ∈ Σ∗ is an input to 푀 Uncountable to uncomputable The real number 1/7 is “computable”.
    [Show full text]
  • Isotropy of Quadratic Spaces in Finite and Infinite Dimension
    Documenta Math. 473 Isotropy of Quadratic Spaces in Finite and Infinite Dimension Karim Johannes Becher, Detlev W. Hoffmann Received: October 6, 2006 Revised: September 13, 2007 Communicated by Alexander Merkurjev Abstract. In the late 1970s, Herbert Gross asked whether there exist fields admitting anisotropic quadratic spaces of arbitrarily large finite dimensions but none of infinite dimension. We construct exam- ples of such fields and also discuss related problems in the theory of central simple algebras and in Milnor K-theory. 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification: 11E04, 11E81, 12D15, 12E15, 12F20, 12G05, 12G10, 16K20, 19D45 Keywords and Phrases: quadratic form, isotropy, infinite-dimensional quadratic space, u-invariant, function field of a quadric, totally indef- inite form, real field, division algebra, quaternion algebra, symbol al- gebra, Galois cohomology, cohomological dimension, Milnor K-theory 1 Introduction A quadratic space over a field F is a pair (V, q) of a vector space V over F together with a map q : V F such that −→ q(λx) = λ2q(x) for all λ F , x V , and • ∈ ∈ the map bq : V V F defined by bq(x,y) = q(x + y) q(x) q(y) • (x,y V ) is F -bilinear.× −→ − − ∈ If dim V = n < , one may identify (after fixing a basis of V ) the quadratic space (V, q) with∞ a form (a homogeneous polynomial) of degree 2 in n variables. Via this identification, a finite-dimensional quadratic space over F will also be referred to as quadratic form over F . Recall that a quadratic space (V, q) is Documenta Mathematica 12 (2007) 473–504 474 Karim Johannes Becher, Detlev W.
    [Show full text]
  • Computability on the Integers
    Computability on the integers Laurent Bienvenu ( LIAFA, CNRS & Université de Paris 7 ) EJCIM 2011 Amiens, France 30 mars 2011 1. Basic objects of computability The formalization and study of the notion of computable function is what computability theory is about. As opposed to complexity theory, we do not care about efficiency, just about feasibility. Computable. functions What does it means for a function f : N ! N to be computable? 1. Basic objects of computability 3/79 As opposed to complexity theory, we do not care about efficiency, just about feasibility. Computable. functions What does it means for a function f : N ! N to be computable? The formalization and study of the notion of computable function is what computability theory is about. 1. Basic objects of computability 3/79 Computable. functions What does it means for a function f : N ! N to be computable? The formalization and study of the notion of computable function is what computability theory is about. As opposed to complexity theory, we do not care about efficiency, just about feasibility. 1. Basic objects of computability 3/79 But for us, it is now obvious that computable = realizable by a program / algorithm. Surprisingly, the first acceptable formalization (Turing machines) is still one of the best (if not the best) we know today. The. intuition At the time these questions were first considered (1930’s), computers did not exist (at least in the modern sense). 1. Basic objects of computability 4/79 Surprisingly, the first acceptable formalization (Turing machines) is still one of the best (if not the best) we know today.
    [Show full text]
  • Quadratic Form - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
    Quadratic form - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadratic_form Quadratic form From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia In mathematics, a quadratic form is a homogeneous polynomial of degree two in a number of variables. For example, is a quadratic form in the variables x and y. Quadratic forms occupy a central place in various branches of mathematics, including number theory, linear algebra, group theory (orthogonal group), differential geometry (Riemannian metric), differential topology (intersection forms of four-manifolds), and Lie theory (the Killing form). Contents 1 Introduction 2 History 3 Real quadratic forms 4 Definitions 4.1 Quadratic spaces 4.2 Further definitions 5 Equivalence of forms 6 Geometric meaning 7 Integral quadratic forms 7.1 Historical use 7.2 Universal quadratic forms 8 See also 9 Notes 10 References 11 External links Introduction Quadratic forms are homogeneous quadratic polynomials in n variables. In the cases of one, two, and three variables they are called unary, binary, and ternary and have the following explicit form: where a,…,f are the coefficients.[1] Note that quadratic functions, such as ax2 + bx + c in the one variable case, are not quadratic forms, as they are typically not homogeneous (unless b and c are both 0). The theory of quadratic forms and methods used in their study depend in a large measure on the nature of the 1 of 8 27/03/2013 12:41 Quadratic form - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadratic_form coefficients, which may be real or complex numbers, rational numbers, or integers. In linear algebra, analytic geometry, and in the majority of applications of quadratic forms, the coefficients are real or complex numbers.
    [Show full text]
  • Computability Theory
    CSC 438F/2404F Notes (S. Cook and T. Pitassi) Fall, 2019 Computability Theory This section is partly inspired by the material in \A Course in Mathematical Logic" by Bell and Machover, Chap 6, sections 1-10. Other references: \Introduction to the theory of computation" by Michael Sipser, and \Com- putability, Complexity, and Languages" by M. Davis and E. Weyuker. Our first goal is to give a formal definition for what it means for a function on N to be com- putable by an algorithm. Historically the first convincing such definition was given by Alan Turing in 1936, in his paper which introduced what we now call Turing machines. Slightly before Turing, Alonzo Church gave a definition based on his lambda calculus. About the same time G¨odel,Herbrand, and Kleene developed definitions based on recursion schemes. Fortunately all of these definitions are equivalent, and each of many other definitions pro- posed later are also equivalent to Turing's definition. This has lead to the general belief that these definitions have got it right, and this assertion is roughly what we now call \Church's Thesis". A natural definition of computable function f on N allows for the possibility that f(x) may not be defined for all x 2 N, because algorithms do not always halt. Thus we will use the symbol 1 to mean “undefined". Definition: A partial function is a function n f :(N [ f1g) ! N [ f1g; n ≥ 0 such that f(c1; :::; cn) = 1 if some ci = 1. In the context of computability theory, whenever we refer to a function on N, we mean a partial function in the above sense.
    [Show full text]
  • Orthogonal Symmetries and Clifford Algebras 11
    ORTHOGONAL SYMMETRIES AND CLIFFORD ALGEBRAS M. G. MAHMOUDI Abstract. Involutions of the Clifford algebra of a quadratic space induced by orthogonal symmetries are investigated. 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification: 16W10, 11E39 Key words: Orthogonal symmetry, reflection, Clifford algebra, Involution, qua- dratic form, even Clifford algebra, multiquaternion algebra, universal property of Clifford algebra, Clifford map 1. Introduction Clifford algebra is one of the important algebraic structures which can be associ- ated to a quadratic form. These algebras are among the most fascinating algebraic structures. Not only they have many applications in algebra and other branches of Mathematics, but also they have wide applications beyond Mathematics, e.g., Physics, Computer Science and Engineering [6], [18], [14], [15]. A detailed historical account of Clifford algebras from their genesis can be found in [21]. See also [7] and [14] for an interesting brief historical account of Clifford algebras. Many familiar algebras can be regarded as special cases of Clifford algebras. For example the algebra of Complex numbers is isomorphic to the Clifford algebra of any one-dimensional negative definite quadratic form over R. The algebra of Hamilton quaternions is isomorphic to the Clifford algebras of a two-dimensional negative definite quadratic form over R. More generally, as shown by D. Lewis in [13, Proposition 1], a multiquaternion algebra, i.e., an algebra like Q1 Qn ⊗···⊗ff where Qi is a quaternion algebra over a field K, can be regarded as the Cli ord algebra of a suitable nondegenerate quadratic form q over the base field K. In [13], such a form q is also explicitly constructed.
    [Show full text]