At Tue, 10 Sep 2002 15:33:17 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In that sense, floating-point FFT and NTT are similar -
in both cases you need enough bits to accomodate the full convolution
output digits. The only advantage NTT has here is that you don't sacrifice
any bits of your computer words to
Brendan Younger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know there has been some discussion on this list about the
theoretical possibility of staying in frequency space and doing a bunch
of point-wise squarings in there instead of computing the inverse DWT
after every iteration. Now, I'm not suggesting
On Tuesday, September 10, 2002, at 01:00 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brendan Younger [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I know there has been some discussion on this list about the
>theoretical possibility of staying in frequency space and doing a bunch
>of point-wise squarings in there instead of
In a message dated 9/10/2002 11:47:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Let me see if I understand correctly. Most of the literature I've seen
dealing with NTTs for large-integer multiplication has always said to
pick a field with size (input values)^2 so that you get the
