Abstract
Normal bases are widely used in applications of Galois fields and Galois rings in areas such as coding, encryption symmetric algorithms (block cipher), signal processing, and so on. In this paper, we study the normal bases for Galois ring extension , where We present a criterion on the normal basis for and reduce this problem to one of finite field extension by Theorem 1. We determine all optimal normal bases for Galois ring extension.
1. Introduction
The theory of finite fields has been one of the fundamental mathematical tools in computer science and communication engineering since the 1950s, when digit communications and computations were rapidly developed. Low complexity operation, particularly the multiplicative operation, squaring, and exponentiation operations, are preferred in various applications, including coding, cryptography, and communication. The performance of these operations is closely related to the representation of the finite elements; they are desired for efficient hardware implementation, and in this respect, many useful bases for with low complexity have been found [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]. An efficient algorithm for field multiplication using a normal basis was proposed by Massey and Omura in 1985 [12].
In the past two decades, Galois rings have been used successfully in many aspects, such as in combinatorics to construct different kinds of combinatorial designs and in communication theory to construct error-correcting codes, sequences with good correlation properties, secret sharing schemes, hash functions, and so on [3,13,14,15,16]. However, compared to the case of finite field extensions, the complexity problem of operations in Galois rings has not attracted much attention from scholars, except Abrahamsson, who considered the complexity of bases and carefully discussed the architectures for multiplication in Galois rings (for ) in his thesis [17] in 2004. These are motivation by our study of operations, particularly for multiplicative operation, with low complexity in Galois rings.
In this paper, we study one aspect of the complexity problem of operations in Galois rings. More precisely, we mainly focus on the normal bases for Galois ring extensions. This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we introduce some basic facts on Galois rings. Some results on normal bases and some basic properties on the multiplicative complexity of normal bases for Galois ring extension are presented in Section 3. Then, we determine all optimal normal bases for these Galois ring extensions in Section 4.
2. Basic Facts about Galois Rings
In this section, we introduce several basic facts about Galois rings. For more information, the reader is referred to [18].
Let p be a prime number and We have the modulo p reduction mapping:
which induces the following modulo p reduction mapping between polynomial rings:
is said to be a monic basic irreducible (primitive) polynomial over if is a monic irreducible (primitive) polynomial over
Let be a basic primitive polynomial of degree n in The quotient ring:
where is a root of in with order , is called a Galois ring. We note that is a primitive element of the finite field where From now on, we take to be a basic primitive polynomial. The modulo p reduction can be naturally extended to the following homomorphism of rings:
Some basic facts about Galois ring are given as follows.
(Fact 1) Let be the cyclic multiplicative group of order generated by , and Then, and:
(Fact 2) is a local commutative ring with the unique maximal ideal , and the group of units is
(Fact 3) is a Galois extension of rings with Galois group where is the automorphism of order n defined by:
More generally, for each positive integer is a subring of and is a Galois extension of rings with Galois group where is the automorphism of defined by:
and
(Fact 4) We have the trace mapping:
defined by:
which is an epimorphism of -modules, and we have the following commutative diagram:
where and are the trace mappings for finite field extensions.
On the other hand, for the modulo reduction gives the homomorphism of rings , and we get the following commutative diagram:
where is the automorphism of defined by:
Next, we need some basic properties of the polynomial ring One of the most important properties of is the following Hensel’s lemma.
Two polynomials and in are called coprime if there exist and in such that
Lemma 1.
([18], Lemma 14.20) Let and Let be a monic polynomial in and be pairwise coprime monic polynomials in If in then there exist pairwise coprime polynomials in such that and
The polynomial is called the Hensel lift of A monic polynomial in is called primary if is a power of a monic irreducible polynomial in . One can deduce the following result from the Hensel’s lemma.
Lemma 2.
([18], Theorem 14.21) Let be a monic polynomial of in We have the following decomposition:
where are pairwise coprime primary polynomials in and are uniquely determined up to their order. Particularly, if where are distinct monic irreducible polynomials in then are distinct monic irreducible polynomials in and
3. Criteria on Normal Bases for Galois Ring Extensions
From (1), we know that is a free -module of rank n and is a basis for , where is an element of order in
Definition 1.
An element is called a normal basis generator (NBG) for extension if is a basis for , where σ is the automorphism of defined by (3). Such a basis is called a normal basis for .
In this section, we present several criteria on normal bases for Galois ring extension , and these criteria can be reduced to the ones of finite field extensions according to the following theorem. Recall that an element is an NBG for if is a normal basis for where is the Frobenius automorphism of defined by for From the definition of in (3), one has for
Theorem 1.
For an element α in , α is an NBG for if and only if is an NBG for finite field extension
Proof.
Suppose that is not an NBG for Then, there exist such that:
and for some Let The formula (7) implies that , so that Therefore, From , we know that and Therefore, is not an NBG for .
On the other hand, suppose that is not an NBG for Then, there exist such that:
and for some Let and From , we get Then, , where and by assuming . The formula (8) implies that , so that Then, from , we get , where and Therefore, is not an NBG for This completes the proof of Theorem 1. □
By Theorem 1, a series of criteria on normal bases for finite field extensions can be shifted to ones for Galois ring extensions.
Lemma 3.
([19])Let and Let be the trace mapping for Then, for is an NBG for if and only if is an NBG for
From the diagram (5), we know that for
Corollary 1.
Let Let , and be the trace mapping from to Then, for is an NBG for if and only if is an NBG for
By Corollary 1, we assume without loss of generality. In this case, has the following decomposition in the polynomial ring
where are distinct monic irreducible polynomials in
Let be the set of all p-polynomials . Then, is a ring with respect to the ordinary addition, and the following multiplication defined by composition ⊗:
and the mapping:
is an isomorphism of rings. Corresponding to the decomposition (9) in we have the following decomposition of:
where are distinct monic irreducible p-polynomials in . Let and
Lemma 4.
([18]) Let and For is an NBG for if and only if .
This is a direct consequence of Theorem 1 and Lemma 4. We have the following criterion.
Corollary 2.
Let , where Then, for is an NBG for if and only if
By the decomposition (9), we have:
where Then, we have the orthogonal idempotents satisfying:
where is the Kronecker symbol. These idempotents can be computed by using the -class of the roots of (see [19]).
In [19], we present a new criterion of NBG for by using idempotents in the ring .
Lemma 5.
([19]) Letting is an NBG for if and only if
Corollary 3.
Let , where Then, for is an NBG for if and only if
In [19], we present more explicit criteria on normal bases for for several specific cases where the decomposition (9) has a simpler form. By Corollary 3, we can give more explicit criteria on normal bases of the Galois ring extension for such cases. For example, let p and n be prime numbers and Then, for is an NBG for if and only if and , where is the trace mapping. Let be the trace mapping. For
and:
Corollary 4.
Let , where p and n are distinct prime numbers and Then, for is an NBG for if and only if both and belong to
We end this section by counting the number of NBG for where . It is well known ([18], Corollary 8.25) that the number of NBG’s for is (let and ):
where is the Euler function and is the order of p in Since the mapping is surjective and -linear, we get that As a direct consequence of Theorem 1, we can count the number of NBG’s for
Corollary 5.
Let p be a prime number and be a positive integer with For the number of NBG’s for is:
and the number of normal bases for is
4. Multiplicative Complexity on Normal Bases
It is known that normal bases on finite fields with low multiplication complexity have several applications in coding theory, cryptography, signal processing, and so on. As a comparison, Abrahamsson discussed the multiplicative complexity on normal bases over Galois rings and considered the architectures for multiplication in Galois rings (for ) in his thesis. In this section, we discuss the complexity of normal bases for extension where .
Definition 2.
Let α be an NBG for , so that is a normal basis for , where σ is the automorphism of defined by (3). Then:
The multiplicative complexity of the normal basis is defined by the number of nonzero Namely,
For each let denote the modulo reduction of The mapping:
is a homomorphism of rings and
For is an NBG for if and only if is an NBG for by Theorem 1, then this is also equivalent to being an NBG for for any Moreover, by the diagram (6), we get that for any the equality (10) implies that:
If then for all Therefore, we get the following simple and basic result.
Theorem 2.
Let and α be an NBG for . Then, for each is an NBG for , where Moreover, let Then:
where is the normal basis for
It is known that for any normal basis for finite field extension Hence, by Theorem 2, for any normal basis for Galois ring extension The basis is called optimal if If is an optimal normal basis for , then by Theorem 2,
Therefore, . Namely, is an optimal normal basis for for all . In particular, is an optimal normal basis for the finite field extension
Definition 3.
Two elements are equivalent to each other if for some denoted by
If is an NBG for and for some It is easy to see that is also an NBG for . Moreover, let:
Then, and:
Since if and only if two normal bases and have the same complexity:
All optimal normal bases for finite field extension have been determined in [8].
Lemma 6.
(Gao and Lenstra [8]) There are only two types of optimal normal bases for finite field extension as follows.
Type (I): and p are distinct prime numbers, and is equivalent to the following (optimal) normal bases for ,
where ξ is an (n+ 1)-th primitive root of one in the algebraic closure of , so that
Type (II): and is a prime number, and is equivalent to the following (optimal) normal bases for :
where ξ is a root of one in the algebraic closure of
Abrahamsson [17] presented the following optimal normal bases for Galois ring extension as a generalization of Type (I) optimal normal bases for finite field extension.
Lemma 7.
([17]) Let p and be distinct prime numbers such that Let ζ be an th root of one in Then:
is an optimal normal basis for
In this section, we determine all optimal normal bases for Galois ring extensions. If and is an optimal normal basis for then is an optimal normal basis for , and then, is an optimal normal basis for Type (I) or Type (II) by Lemma 6. Now, we consider these two cases separately.
Theorem 3.
Suppose that and p are distinct primes and Then, any optimal normal basis for is equivalent to the one given by Lemma 6.
Proof.
For is the finite field extension case. For we assume that is an optimal normal basis for Then, , where is an th primitive root of one in . Let be an th primitive root of one in such that Then, by , where is the cyclic multiplicative group of (see Fact 3 in Section 2), and:
since is a (normal) basis for . Therefore:
and for (we can assume that is an odd prime number, so that n is even),
From , we know that and for some Then, by (13), we have:
where we consider for and assume so Equation (13) becomes:
since and
Therefore for
where:
Then, the complexity where:
For the case of
We get . For we have since for l satisfying Then, we have:
which implies that for all which means that for all and . Let . From (14), one gets that is an optimal normal basis for if and only if when and , we have:
Particularly, for , we get:
If then for all . By assumption this means that for all , so that by (11), and the basis is equivalent to the one given by Lemma 6.
Now, we assume that For any fixed by (15), we get:
where Therefore:
for all If and we get for all . In particular, for , we get and:
Therefore, and since Then, we have and for Taking in (15) and remarking that we get for
Namely,
Since, for
we know that Therefore, and Therefore, is equivalent to the one given by Lemma 6. If from (16), we have In this case, we fix , and the condition (15) implies that:
Let we get:
Consider the fraction linear transformation:
with matrix For any , so that:
Therefore, By (17), we get:
Thus, This completes the proof of Theorem 3 for .
Now, we assume that , and this theorem is true for Let , and is an optimal normal basis for By assumption, we have, up to equivalence,
Then, the same argument for can be shifted to get for all Therefore, This completes the proof of Theorem 3. □
Remark 1.
Gao and Lenstra determined all optimal normal bases by using the Galois theory on finite fields [8] and consequently confirmed a conjecture that was raised by Mullin et al. Here, we give a direct proof of the Theorem 3 by using the mathematical induction.
Theorem 4.
Assume that is an odd prime number and Let Then:
(1) If there is no optimal normal basis for
(2) If and is an optimal normal basis for if and only if α is equivalent to , where ζ is a fifth primitive root of one in , so that , and b is the unique element in satisfying
Proof.
(1) First, we consider . Suppose that , and is an optimal normal basis for . Then, is an optimal normal basis for . By Lemma 6, is equivalent to , where is a th primitive root of one in . Let be the th primitive root of one in such that Then, , and up to equivalence:
Since is a normal basis for by the assumption that , also, this tell us that Therefore, we know that:
and:
Let:
We define:
Then, Since:
We get and for . Then, from , we know that and for . However,
where is an integer determined by and so that From , we get for all By (18), we have:
and:
where is determined by and If , then Therefore, Therefore, we proved that there is no optimal normal basis in the case
(2) Letting and is an optimal normal basis for . By Lemma 6, we get:
where is a fifth primitive root of one in , so that and Since is invertible in we can assume, up to equivalence,
Then, , so that:
and by (20), we have:
where Therefore, is an optimal basis for if and only if , and then, if and only if
Let be the ring of two-adic integers. Consider We have and , where is the two-adic exponential valuation. From Hensel’s lemma and , we know that there exists unique such that for any This completes the proof of Theorem 4. □
Putting Theorem 3 together with Theorem 4, we can derive the following results.
Theorem 5.
Let Then:
(1) There exists the optimal normal basis for if and only if (A) and p are distinct prime numbers, and ; or (B)
(2) For Case (A), is an optimal normal basis for if and only if α is equivalent to an primitive root ζ of one. Namely,
(3) For Case (B), is an optimal normal basis for if and only if α is equivalent to , where ζ is a fifth primitive root of one in so that , and is the unique element satisfying
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, K.F.; methodology, K.F. and A.Z.; validation, A.Z.; writing, original draft preparation, A.Z.; writing, review, K.F.; supervision, K.F.; funding acquisition, K.F.
Funding
This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grants 11471178 and 11571107.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- Ash, D.W.; Blake, I.F.; Vanstone, S.A. Low complexity normal bases. Discrete Appl. Math. 1989, 25, 191–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ballet, S.; Chaumine, J.; Pieltant, J.; Rolland, R. On the tensor rank of multiplication in finite extensions of finite fields. J. Number Theory 2011, 128, 1795–1806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boztas, S.; Hammons, R.; Kumar, P.Y. 4-phase sequences with near-optimum correlation properties. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 1992, 38, 1101–1113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cascudo, I.; Cramer, R.; Xing, C.; Yang, A. Asymptotic bound for multiplication complexity in the extensio s of small finite fields. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 2012, 58, 4930–4935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Christopolou, M.; Garefalakis, T.; Panario, D.; Thomson, D. Gauss periods as constructions of low complexity normal bases. Des. Codes Cryptogr. 2012, 62, 43–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, S. Normal Bases over Finite Fields. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, S. Abelian groups, Gauss periods and normal bases. Finite Fields Appl. 2001, 7, 149–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, S.; Lenstra, H.W. Optimal normal bases. Des. Codes Cryptogr. 1992, 2, 315–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liao, Q. The Gaussian normal basis and its trace basis over finite field. J. Number Theory 2012, 132, 1507–1518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liao, Q.; Feng, K. On the complexity of the normal bases via prime Gauss period over finite fields. J. Syst. Sci. Complex. 2009, 22, 395–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liao, Q.; You, L. Low complexity of a class of normal bases over finite fields. Finite Fields Appl. 2011, 17, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Massey, J.L.; Omura, K. Computation Method and Apparatus for Finite Field Arithmatic. U.S. Patent 4587627, 6 May 1986. [Google Scholar]
- Hammons, A.R.; Kumar, P.V., Jr.; Calderbank, A.R. The Z4-linearity of Kerdock, Preparata, Goethals, and related codes. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 1994, 40, 301–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Helleseth, T.; Johansson, T. Universal hash functions from exponential sums over finite fields and Galois rings. In Advances in Cryptology-CRYPTO’ 96; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1996; pp. 31–44. [Google Scholar]
- Yamada, M. Gifference sets over Galois rings with odd extension degrees and characteristic an even power of 2. Des. Codes Cryptogr. 2013, 67, 37–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yildiz, B. A combinatorial construction of the Gray map over Galois rings. Discrete Math. 2009, 309, 3408–3412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abrahamsson, B. Architectures for Multiplication in Galois Rings. Linköping, Sweden, 2004. Available online: http://www.ep.liu.se/exjobb/isy/ex/3549/ (accessed on 9 June 2004).
- Wan, Z.X. Lecture Notes on Finite Fields and Galois Rings; World Scientific: Singapore, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, A.; Feng, K. A new criterion on normal bases for finite field extensions. Finite Fields Appl. 2015, 31, 25–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).