Abstract
In many respects the problem of computing the greatest common divisor of two polyno- mials is a fundamental concern of algebraic manipulation. Once pioneer computer algebra systems (such as ALPAK or PM) had routines for polynomial operations, the natural pro gression was to develop routines for the manipulation of rational functions. It soon became apparent that rational manipulation leads to a severe problem of intermediate expression swell. For example, consider the problem of adding two rational functions.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.W.S. Brown, “On Euclid’s Algorithm and the Computation of Polynomial Greatest Divisors,” J. ACM, 18 pp. 476–504 (1971).Google Scholar
- 2.W.S. Brown and J.F. Traub, “On Euclid’s Algorithm and the Theory of Subresultants,” J. ACM, 18 pp. 505–514 (1971).zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- 3.B.W. Char, K.O. Geddes, and G.H. Gonnet, “GCDHEU: Heuristic Polynomial GCD Algorithm Based on Integer GCD Computation,” J. Symbolic Comp., 9 pp. 31–48 (1989).CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- 4.G.E. Collins, “Subresultants and Reduced Polynomial Remainder Sequences,” J. ACM, 14(1) pp. 128–142 (1967).zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.J.H. Davenport and J.A. Padget, “HEUGCD: How Elementary Upperbounds Generate Cheaper Data,” pp. 11–28 in Proc. EUROCAL’ 85, Vol. 2, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 204, ed. B.F. Caviness, Springer-Verlag (1985).Google Scholar
- 6.K.O. Geddes, G.H. Gonnet, and TJ. Smedley, “Heuristic Methods for Operations with Algebraic Numbers,” pp. 475–480 in Proc. ISSAC’ 88, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 358, ed. P. Gianni, Springer-Verlag (1988).Google Scholar
- 7.W. Habicht, “Eine Verallgemeinerung des Sturmschen Wurzelzaehlverfahlens,” Commentarii Mathematici Helvetici, 21 pp. 99–116 (1948).zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- 8.D.E. Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming, Volume 2: Seminumerical Algorithms (second edition), Addison-Wesley (1981).Google Scholar
- 9.M.A. Laidacker, “Another Theorem Relating Sylvester’s Matrix and the Greatest Common Divisor,” Mathematics Magazine, 42 pp. 126–128 (1969).zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- 10.R. Loos, “Generalized Polynomial Remainder Sequences,” pp. 115–137 in Computer Algebra — Symbolic and Algebraic Computation, ed. B. Buchberger, G.E. Collins and R. Loos, Springer-Verlag (1982).Google Scholar
- 11.M. Mignotte, “Some Useful Bounds.,” pp. 259–263 in Computer Algebra — Symbolic and Algebraic Computation, ed. B. Buchberger, G.E. Collins and R. Loos, Springer-Verlag (1982).Google Scholar
- 12.M. Monagan, “Signatures + Abstract Data Types = Computer Algebra — Intermediate Expression Swell,” Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of CS, Univ. of Waterloo (1989).Google Scholar
- 13.J. Moses and D.Y.Y. Yun, “The EZGCD Algorithm,” pp. 159–166 in Proc. ACM Annual Conference, (1973).Google Scholar
- 14.A. Schonhage, “Probabilistic Computation of Integer Polynomial GCDs,” J. of Algorithms, 9 pp. 265–271 (1988).CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- 15.J.J. Sylvester, “On a Theory of the Syzygetic Relations of Two Rational Integral Functions Comprising an Application to the Theory of Sturm Functions and that of the Greatest Algebraic Common Measure,” Philisophical Transactions, 143 pp. 407–548 (1853).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.P.S. Wang, “The EEZ-GCD Algorithm,” ACM SIGSAM Bull., 14 pp. 50–60 (1980).zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.S.M. Watt, “Bounded Parallelism in Computer Algebra,” Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of CS, Univ. of Waterloo (1986).Google Scholar
- 18.H. Zassenhaus, “Hensel Factorization I,” J. Number Theory, 1 pp. 291–311 (1969).zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- 19.R.E. Zippel, “Probabilistic Algorithms for Sparse Polynomials,” Ph.D. Thesis, M.I.T. (1979).Google Scholar
Copyright information
© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1992