Trace Zero Cryptography - Revision history

en>BG19bot: /* Arithmetic */WP:CHECKWIKI error fix for #99. Broken sup tag. Do general fixes if a problem exists. -, replaced: ^{th → ^th using AWB (9957)}

2014-03-01T08:53:15Z

Arithmetic: WP:CHECKWIKI error fix for #99. Broken sup tag. Do general fixes if a problem exists. -, replaced: th → th using AWB (9957)

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:53, 1 March 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~In [[coding theory]], a '~~''polynomial code''' is a type of [[linear code]] whose set of valid [[code words]] consists of those [[polynomials]] (usually of some fixed length) that are [[polynomial long division\|divisible]] by a given fixed polynomial (of shorter length, called the ''generator polynomial'').		I'm Jewell and I live in Beerze. <br>I'm interested in Design and Technology, Speed skating and Norwegian art. I like travelling and watching The Simpsons.<br><br>Feel free to surf to my web blog; [http://www.sampower.co.kr/102849 wordpress dropbox backup]

	~~== Definition ==~~

	Fix a [[finite field]] <math>GF(q)</math>, whose elements we call ''symbols''. For the purposes of constructing polynomial codes, we identify a string of <math>n</math> symbols <math>a_{n-1}\ldots a_0</math> with the polynomial

	~~:<math>a_{n-1}x^{n-1} + \cdots + a_1x + a_0.\,</math>~~

	~~Fix integers <math>~~m ~~\leq n</math>~~ and ~~let <math>g(x)</math> be some fixed polynomial of degree <math>m</math>, called the ''generator polynomial''~~. ~~The ''polynomial code generated by <math>g(x)~~<~~/math~~>'~~' is the code whose code words are precisely the polynomials of degree less than <math>n</math> that are [[polynomial long division\|divisible]] (without remainder) by <math>g(x)</math>.~~

	~~== Example ==~~

	~~Consider the polynomial code over <math>GF(2)=\{0,1\}</math> with <math>n=5</math>, <math>~~m~~=2</math>~~, and ~~generator polynomial <math>g(x)=x^2+x+1</math>. This code consists of the following code words:~~

	~~:<math>0\cdot g(x),\quad 1\cdot g(x),\quad x\cdot g(x), \quad (x+1) \cdot g(x),</math>~~

	~~:<math>x^2 \cdot g(x),\quad (x^2+1)\cdot g(x),\quad (x^2+x)\cdot g(x), \quad (x^2+x+1) \cdot g(x).</math>~~

	~~Or written explicitly:~~

	~~:<math>0,\quad x^2+x+1,\quad x^3+x^2+x,\quad x^3+1,</math>~~

	~~:<math>x^4+x^3+x^2,\quad x^4+x^3+x+1,\quad x^4+x,\quad x^4+x^2+1.</math>~~

	~~Equivalently, expressed as strings of binary digits, the codewords are:~~

	~~:<math>00000,\quad 00111,\quad 01110,\quad 01001,</math>~~

	~~:<math>11100,\quad 11011,\quad 10010,\quad 10101~~.~~</math>~~

	~~Note that this, as every polynomial code, is indeed a [[linear code]], i.e., linear combinations of code words are again code words. In a case~~ like ~~this where the field is GF(2), linear combinations are found by taking the XOR of the codewords expressed in binary form (e.g. 00111 XOR 10010 = 10101).~~

	~~== Encoding ==~~

	~~In a polynomial code over <math>GF(q)</math> with code length <math>n</math>~~ and ~~generator polynomial <math>g(x)</math> of degree <math>m</math>,~~
	~~there will be exactly <math>q^{n-m}</math> code words~~. ~~Indeed, by definition,~~ <~~math~~>~~p(x)~~<~~/math~~> is a code word if and only if it is of the form <math>p(x) = g(x)\cdot q(x)</math>, where <math>q(x)</math> (the ''quotient'') is of degree less than <math>n-m</math>. Since there are <math>q^{n-m}</math> such quotients available, there is the same number of possible code words.
	~~Plain (unencoded) data words should therefore be of length <math>n-m</math>~~

	~~Some authors, such as (Lidl & Pilz, 1999), only discuss the mapping <math>q(x) \mapsto g(x)\cdot q(x)</math> as the assignment from data words~~ to ~~code words. However, this has the disadvantage that the data word does not appear as part of the code word.~~

	~~Instead, the following method is often used~~ to ~~create a~~ [~~[systematic code]]~~: ~~given a data word <math>d(x)</math> of length <math>n-m</math>, first multiply <math>d(x)</math> by <math>x^m</math>, which has the effect of shifting <math>d(x)<~~/~~math> by <math>m<~~/~~math> places to the left~~. In general, <math>x^md(x)</math> will not be divisible by <math>g(x)</math>, i.e., it will not be a valid code word. However, there is a unique code word that can be obtained by adjusting the rightmost <math>m</math> symbols of <math>x^md(x)</math>.
	~~To calculate it, compute the remainder of dividing <math>x^md(x)</math> by <math>g(x)</math>:~~

	~~:<math>x^md(x) = g(x)\cdot q(x) + r(x),\,</math>~~

	~~where <math>r(x)</math> is of degree less than <math>m</math>. The code word corresponding to the data word <math>d(x)</math> is then defined to be~~

	~~:<math>p(x) := x^md(x) - r(x),\,</math>~~

	~~Note the following properties:~~
	~~# <math>p(x) = g(x)\cdot q(x)</math>, which is divisible by <math>g(x)</math>~~. ~~In particular, <math>p(x)</math> is a valid code word~~.
	~~# Since <math>r(x)<~~/math> is of degree less than <math>m</math>, the leftmost <math>n-m</math> symbols of <math>p(x)</math> agree with the corresponding symbols of <math>x^md(x)</math>. In other words, the first <math>n-m</math> symbols of the code word are the same as the original data word. The remaining <math>m</math> symbols are called ''checksum digits'' or ''check bits''.

	~~=== Example ===~~

	~~For the above code with <math>n=5</math>, <math>m=2</math>, and generator polynomial <math>g(x)=x^2+x+1</math>, we obtain the following assignment from data words to codewords:~~

	* 000 {{mapsto}} '''000'''00
	* 001 {{mapsto}} '''001'''11
	* 010 {{mapsto}} '''010'''01
	* 011 {{mapsto}} '''011'''10
	* 100 {{mapsto}} '''100'''10
	* 101 {{mapsto}} '''101'''01
	* 110 {{mapsto}} '''110'''11
	* 111 {{mapsto}} '''111'''00

	~~== Decoding ==~~

	~~An erroneous message can be detected in a straightforward way through polynomial division by the generator polynomial resulting in a non-zero remainder.~~

	~~Assuming that the code word is free of errors, a systematic code can be decoded simply by stripping away the <math>m</math> checksum digits.~~

	~~If there are errors, then error correction should be performed before decoding. Efficient decoding algorithms exist for specific polynomial codes, such as [[BCH code]]s.~~

	~~== Properties of polynomial codes ==~~

	As for all digital codes, the [[error detection and correction]] abilities of polynomial codes are determined by the minimum [[Hamming distance]] of the code. Since polynomial codes are linear codes, the minimum Hamming distance is equal to the minimum weight of any non-zero codeword. In the example above, the minimum Hamming distance is 2, since 01001 is a codeword, and there is no nonzero codeword with only one bit set.

	~~More specific properties of a polynomial code often depend on particular algebraic properties of its generator polynomial. Here are some examples of such properties:~~

	* A polynomial code is [[cyclic code\|cyclic]] if and only if the generator polynomial divides <math>x^n-1</math>.
	* If the generator polynomial is [[Primitive polynomial (field theory)\|primitive]], then the resulting code has Hamming distance at least 3, provided that <math>n\leq 2^m-1</math>.
	* In [[BCH code]]s, the generator polynomial is chosen to have specific roots in an extension field, in a way that achieves high Hamming distance.

	~~The algebraic nature of polynomial codes, with cleverly chosen generator polynomials, can also often be exploited to find efficient error correction algorithms. This is the case for [[BCH code]]s.~~

	~~== Specific families of polynomial codes ==~~

	* [[Cyclic code]]s – every cyclic code is also a polynomial code; a popular example is the [[cyclic redundancy check\|CRC]] code.
	* [[BCH code]]s – a family of cyclic codes with high Hamming distance and efficient algebraic error correction algorithms.
	* [[Reed–Solomon code]]s – an important subset of BCH codes with particularly efficient structure.

	~~== References ==~~
	* W.J. Gilbert and W.K. Nicholson: ''Modern Algebra with Applications'', 2nd edition, Wiley, 2004.
	* R. Lidl and G. Pilz. Applied Abstract Algebra, 2nd edition. Wiley, 1999.
	~~{{Reflist}}~~
	~~[[Category:Coding theory]~~]

en>Yobot: WP:CHECKWIKI errors fixed + general fixes using AWB (8961)

2013-03-07T20:00:05Z

WP:CHECKWIKI errors fixed + general fixes using AWB (8961)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:00, 7 March 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~They get in touch with me~~ [~~http://Www.encyclopedia.com/searchresults.aspx?q=Lan+Ide Lan Ide~~]~~. Taking care~~ of ~~persons is my day career now and I am going to be promoted shortly. Pennsylvania is the position I love most and my household loves it. To engage in~~ [~~http://Baseball.com/ baseball~~] is a ~~matter that I am totally addicted to. I am not excellent at webdesign but you could want to verify my website: http://www.juno.es/imagenes/thumbs/zapatillas-salomon-trekking~~.~~aspx<br><br>~~		In [[coding theory]], a '''polynomial code''' is a type of [[linear code]] whose set of valid [[code words]] consists of those [[polynomials]] (usually of some fixed length) that are [[polynomial long division\|divisible]] by a given fixed polynomial (of shorter length, called the ''generator polynomial'').

	~~Here~~ is ~~my web~~-~~site;~~ [~~http~~://~~www~~.~~juno~~.es/~~imagenes~~/~~thumbs~~/~~zapatillas~~-~~salomon~~-~~trekking~~.~~aspx Zapatillas Salomon Trekking~~]		== Definition ==

			Fix a [[finite field]] <math>GF(q)</math>, whose elements we call ''symbols''. For the purposes of constructing polynomial codes, we identify a string of <math>n</math> symbols <math>a_{n-1}\ldots a_0</math> with the polynomial

			:<math>a_{n-1}x^{n-1} + \cdots + a_1x + a_0.\,</math>

			Fix integers <math>m \leq n</math> and let <math>g(x)</math> be some fixed polynomial of degree <math>m</math>, called the ''generator polynomial''. The ''polynomial code generated by <math>g(x)</math>'' is the code whose code words are precisely the polynomials of degree less than <math>n</math> that are [[polynomial long division\|divisible]] (without remainder) by <math>g(x)</math>.

			== Example ==

			Consider the polynomial code over <math>GF(2)=\{0,1\}</math> with <math>n=5</math>, <math>m=2</math>, and generator polynomial <math>g(x)=x^2+x+1</math>. This code consists of the following code words:

			:<math>0\cdot g(x),\quad 1\cdot g(x),\quad x\cdot g(x), \quad (x+1) \cdot g(x),</math>

			:<math>x^2 \cdot g(x),\quad (x^2+1)\cdot g(x),\quad (x^2+x)\cdot g(x), \quad (x^2+x+1) \cdot g(x).</math>

			Or written explicitly:

			:<math>0,\quad x^2+x+1,\quad x^3+x^2+x,\quad x^3+1,</math>

			:<math>x^4+x^3+x^2,\quad x^4+x^3+x+1,\quad x^4+x,\quad x^4+x^2+1.</math>

			Equivalently, expressed as strings of binary digits, the codewords are:

			:<math>00000,\quad 00111,\quad 01110,\quad 01001,</math>

			:<math>11100,\quad 11011,\quad 10010,\quad 10101.</math>

			Note that this, as every polynomial code, is indeed a [[linear code]], i.e., linear combinations of code words are again code words. In a case like this where the field is GF(2), linear combinations are found by taking the XOR of the codewords expressed in binary form (e.g. 00111 XOR 10010 = 10101).

			== Encoding ==

			In a polynomial code over <math>GF(q)</math> with code length <math>n</math> and generator polynomial <math>g(x)</math> of degree <math>m</math>,
			there will be exactly <math>q^{n-m}</math> code words. Indeed, by definition, <math>p(x)</math> is a code word if and only if it is of the form <math>p(x) = g(x)\cdot q(x)</math>, where <math>q(x)</math> (the ''quotient'') is of degree less than <math>n-m</math>. Since there are <math>q^{n-m}</math> such quotients available, there is the same number of possible code words.
			Plain (unencoded) data words should therefore be of length <math>n-m</math>

			Some authors, such as (Lidl & Pilz, 1999), only discuss the mapping <math>q(x) \mapsto g(x)\cdot q(x)</math> as the assignment from data words to code words. However, this has the disadvantage that the data word does not appear as part of the code word.

			Instead, the following method is often used to create a [[systematic code]]: given a data word <math>d(x)</math> of length <math>n-m</math>, first multiply <math>d(x)</math> by <math>x^m</math>, which has the effect of shifting <math>d(x)</math> by <math>m</math> places to the left. In general, <math>x^md(x)</math> will not be divisible by <math>g(x)</math>, i.e., it will not be a valid code word. However, there is a unique code word that can be obtained by adjusting the rightmost <math>m</math> symbols of <math>x^md(x)</math>.
			To calculate it, compute the remainder of dividing <math>x^md(x)</math> by <math>g(x)</math>:

			:<math>x^md(x) = g(x)\cdot q(x) + r(x),\,</math>

			where <math>r(x)</math> is of degree less than <math>m</math>. The code word corresponding to the data word <math>d(x)</math> is then defined to be

			:<math>p(x) := x^md(x) - r(x),\,</math>

			Note the following properties:
			# <math>p(x) = g(x)\cdot q(x)</math>, which is divisible by <math>g(x)</math>. In particular, <math>p(x)</math> is a valid code word.
			# Since <math>r(x)</math> is of degree less than <math>m</math>, the leftmost <math>n-m</math> symbols of <math>p(x)</math> agree with the corresponding symbols of <math>x^md(x)</math>. In other words, the first <math>n-m</math> symbols of the code word are the same as the original data word. The remaining <math>m</math> symbols are called ''checksum digits'' or ''check bits''.

			=== Example ===

			For the above code with <math>n=5</math>, <math>m=2</math>, and generator polynomial <math>g(x)=x^2+x+1</math>, we obtain the following assignment from data words to codewords:

			* 000 {{mapsto}} '''000'''00
			* 001 {{mapsto}} '''001'''11
			* 010 {{mapsto}} '''010'''01
			* 011 {{mapsto}} '''011'''10
			* 100 {{mapsto}} '''100'''10
			* 101 {{mapsto}} '''101'''01
			* 110 {{mapsto}} '''110'''11
			* 111 {{mapsto}} '''111'''00

			== Decoding ==

			An erroneous message can be detected in a straightforward way through polynomial division by the generator polynomial resulting in a non-zero remainder.

			Assuming that the code word is free of errors, a systematic code can be decoded simply by stripping away the <math>m</math> checksum digits.

			If there are errors, then error correction should be performed before decoding. Efficient decoding algorithms exist for specific polynomial codes, such as [[BCH code]]s.

			== Properties of polynomial codes ==

			As for all digital codes, the [[error detection and correction]] abilities of polynomial codes are determined by the minimum [[Hamming distance]] of the code. Since polynomial codes are linear codes, the minimum Hamming distance is equal to the minimum weight of any non-zero codeword. In the example above, the minimum Hamming distance is 2, since 01001 is a codeword, and there is no nonzero codeword with only one bit set.

			More specific properties of a polynomial code often depend on particular algebraic properties of its generator polynomial. Here are some examples of such properties:

			* A polynomial code is [[cyclic code\|cyclic]] if and only if the generator polynomial divides <math>x^n-1</math>.
			* If the generator polynomial is [[Primitive polynomial (field theory)\|primitive]], then the resulting code has Hamming distance at least 3, provided that <math>n\leq 2^m-1</math>.
			* In [[BCH code]]s, the generator polynomial is chosen to have specific roots in an extension field, in a way that achieves high Hamming distance.

			The algebraic nature of polynomial codes, with cleverly chosen generator polynomials, can also often be exploited to find efficient error correction algorithms. This is the case for [[BCH code]]s.

			== Specific families of polynomial codes ==

			* [[Cyclic code]]s – every cyclic code is also a polynomial code; a popular example is the [[cyclic redundancy check\|CRC]] code.
			* [[BCH code]]s – a family of cyclic codes with high Hamming distance and efficient algebraic error correction algorithms.
			* [[Reed–Solomon code]]s – an important subset of BCH codes with particularly efficient structure.

			== References ==
			* W.J. Gilbert and W.K. Nicholson: ''Modern Algebra with Applications'', 2nd edition, Wiley, 2004.
			* R. Lidl and G. Pilz. Applied Abstract Algebra, 2nd edition. Wiley, 1999.
			{{Reflist}}
			[[Category:Coding theory]]

en>FrescoBot: Bot: link syntax/spacing and minor changes

2012-07-05T19:20:42Z

Bot: link syntax/spacing and minor changes

New page

They get in touch with me [http://Www.encyclopedia.com/searchresults.aspx?q=Lan+Ide Lan Ide]. Taking care of persons is my day career now and I am going to be promoted shortly. Pennsylvania is the position I love most and my household loves it. To engage in [http://Baseball.com/ baseball] is a matter that I am totally addicted to. I am not excellent at webdesign but you could want to verify my website: http://www.juno.es/imagenes/thumbs/zapatillas-salomon-trekking.aspx 

Here is my web-site; [http://www.juno.es/imagenes/thumbs/zapatillas-salomon-trekking.aspx Zapatillas Salomon Trekking]

Trace Zero Cryptography - Revision history

en>BG19bot: /* Arithmetic */WP:CHECKWIKI error fix for #99. Broken sup tag. Do general fixes if a problem exists. -, replaced: th → th using AWB (9957)

en>Yobot: WP:CHECKWIKI errors fixed + general fixes using AWB (8961)

en>FrescoBot: Bot: link syntax/spacing and minor changes

en>BG19bot: /* Arithmetic */WP:CHECKWIKI error fix for #99. Broken sup tag. Do general fixes if a problem exists. -, replaced: ^{th → ^th using AWB (9957)}