## Abstract

One very important concern in number theory is to establish whether a given number *N* is prime or composite. At first sight it might seem that in order to decide the question an attempt must be made to factorize *N* and if it fails, then *N* is a prime. Fortunately there exist primality tests which do not rely upon factorization. This is very lucky indeed, since all factorization methods developed so far are rather laborious. Such an approach would admit only numbers of moderate size to be examined and the situation for deciding on primality would be rather bad. It is interesting to note that methods to determine primality, other than attempting to factorize, do not give any indication of the factors of *N* in the case where *N* turns out to be composite. — Since the prime 2 possesses certain particular properties, we shall, in this and the next chapter, assume for most of the time that *N* is an *odd* integer.

## Keywords

Primitive Root Primality Test Fermat Number Composite Number Compositeness Test## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## Bibliography

- 1.D. H. Lehmer, “On the Converse of Fermat’s Theorem,”
*Amer.Math. Monthly***43**(1936) pp. 347–354.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 2.D. H. Lehmer, “On the Converse of Fermat’s Theorem II,”
*Amer. Math. Monthly***56**(1949) pp. 300–309.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 3.Carl Pomerance, John L. Selfridge and Samuel S. Wagstaff Jr., “The Pseudoprimes to 25 • 10
^{9},”*Math. Comp*.**35**(1980) pp. 1003–1026.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 4.Oystein Ore,
*Number Theory and Its History*, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1948, pp. 331–339.zbMATHGoogle Scholar - 5.Gary Miller, “Riemann’s Hypothesis and Tests for Primality,” Journ. of Comp. and Syst. Sc.
**13**(1976) pp. 300–317.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 6.Carl Pomerance, “On the Distribution of Pseudoprimes,”
*Math. Comp*.**37**(1981) pp. 587–593.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 7.John Brillhart, D. H. Lehmer and John Selfridge, “New Primality Criteria and Factorizations of 2 ± 1,”
*Math. Comp*.**29**(1975) pp. 620–647.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 8.
- 9.H. C. Williams and J. S. Judd, “Some Algorithms for Prime Testing Using Generalized Lehmer Functions,”
*Math. Comp*.**30**(1976) pp. 867–886.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 10.Hans Riesel, “Lucasian Criteria for the Primality of
*N = h*• 2_{n}— 1,”*Math. Comp*.**23**(1969), pp. 869–875.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 11.K. Inkeri and J. Sirkesalo, “Factorization of Certain Numbers of the Form
*h*• 2_{n}+ k,”*Ann. Univ. Turkuensis, Series A*No.**38**(1959)Google Scholar - 12.
- 13.William Adams and Daniel Shanks, “Strong Primality Tests That Are Not Sufficient,”
*Math. Comp*.**39**(1982) pp. 255–300.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 14.Leonard Adleman and Frank T. Leighton, “An
*O(n*^{1/10.89}) Primality Testing Algorithm,”*Math. Comp*.**36**(1981) pp. 261–266.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 15.Carl Pomerance, “Recent Developments in Primality Testing,”
*The Mathematical Intelligencer***3**(1981) pp. 97–105.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 16.Carl Pomerance, “The Search for Prime Numbers,”
*Sc. Amer*.**247**(Dec. 1982) pp. 122–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 17.Leonard M. Adleman, Carl Pomerance and Robert S. Rumely, “On Distinguishing Prime Numbers from Composite Numbers,”
*Ann. of Math*.**117**(1983) pp. 173–206.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 18.H. W. Lenstra Jr., “Primality Testing Algorithms,”
*Séminaire Bourbaki***33**(1980–81) No. 576, pp. 243–257.Google Scholar - 19.H. Cohen and H. W. Lenstra Jr., “Primality Testing and Jacobi Sums,”
*Math. Comp*.**42**(1984) pp. 297–330.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 20.John D. Dixon, “Factorization and Primality Tests,” Am.
*Math. Monthly***91**(1984) pp. 333–352. Contains a large bibliography.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar