Efficient Computation of the Möbius Function

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter CRGreathouse
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Computing Function
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the efficient computation of the Möbius function, particularly in relation to determining whether a number is square-free. Participants explore various algorithms and methods for calculating the function, considering both theoretical and practical implications.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Debate/contested, Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the process of checking if a number is square-free using the Möbius function and discusses the efficiency of finding small prime factors.
  • Another participant questions the claim that the algorithm is "very fast" for numbers with small prime factors, suggesting it implies a distinction between certain forms of numbers.
  • A third participant argues against the implication made by the second participant, stating that it cannot hold true under certain conditions related to the computation of the Möbius function.
  • A later reply confirms that factoring is generally the fastest method for finding the Möbius function, except in specific cases previously mentioned.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the implications of the efficiency claims related to small prime factors and the computation of the Möbius function. The discussion remains unresolved with competing views on the effectiveness of different algorithms.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific algorithms and their complexities, but the discussion does not resolve the open question of whether efficient algorithms for computing the Möbius function exist within polynomial time.

CRGreathouse
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
2,832
Reaction score
0
From the http://documents.wolfram.com/v5/Add-onsLinks/StandardPackages/NumberTheory/NumberTheoryFunctions.html :
SquareFreeQ[n] checks to see if n has a square prime factor. This is done by computing MoebiusMu[n] and seeing if the result is zero; if it is, then n is not squarefree, otherwise it is. Computing MoebiusMu[n] involves finding the smallest prime factor q of n. If n has a small prime factor (less than or equal to 1223), this is very fast. Otherwise, FactorInteger is used to find q.

How does this work? I can't think of a way to compute mu(n) faster than:
* finding a small p for which p^2 | n, or
* finding that n is prime, or
* checking that for all p < (n)^(1/3), p^2 does not divide n
* factoring n, which can be faster than the third option for large nEdit: I checked my copy of "Open problems in number theoretic complexity, II", which has O8: Is SQUAREFREES in P? Assuming that this is still open, any algorithm known would either be superpolynomial or of unproven complexity. But even an exponential-time improvement on the naive algorithm would be of interest.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
The interesting line, to me, is this:
If n has a small prime factor (less than or equal to 1223), this is very fast.

This seems a fairly strong claim. In particular, it would mean that the "very fast" algorithm could distinguish between n = 2pq and n = 2pq^2 for large p and q.

I saw a reference to this at http://www.marmet.org/louis/sqfgap/ :
A faster algorithm is used by "Mathematica" to determine if a number is square-free. The method is quite interesting (see: http://documents.wolfram.com/v5/Add-onsLinks/StandardPackages/NumberTheory/NumberTheoryFunctions.html )
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The implication cannot be true, because it would mean that if N doesn't have a small factor, that we could compute \mu(N) = -\mu(3N), where the latter can be done rapidly.
 
Yeah, I figured as much, thanks.

So factoring n is pretty much the fastest way to find mu(n), right? Except in the special cases I outlined above?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
29
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 175 ·
6
Replies
175
Views
27K
  • · Replies 82 ·
3
Replies
82
Views
16K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K