RE: [PrimeNumbers] MPQS again (after a few months to think about it...)
> Am I missing something here, or is my evaluation correct. If theIt's conventional to "divide" the quadratic residue by the large prime
> latter is true then any benefit of using PMPQS or PPMPQS is surely
> outweighed by the fact that the eventual chance of finding a factor
> is not 50% but maybe 12.5% or even as low as 0.78125% ?
once relations have been combined in this manner. "Divide", of course,
means "multiply by the multiplactive inverse". Having performed this
operation, discard both identical copies of the large prime from the
You should find that this returns the probability back to 50%. Think
- Your claim is that partials and partial-partials yield
a little full relations. It is right in a sense.
But experiments show that PMPQS or PPMPQS yield more full relations
than MPQS for over 70 digits.
You have to notice that the probability yielding full relations
>from partials is not lenear to the number of partials.Have you ever heard about birthday paradox?