5 ms·

15? wow! may i look at your papers?

• cperciva 18y ago
  My publications are at http://www.daemonology.net/papers/ http://www.daemonology.net/papers/, but this doesn't include the work I did when I was 15 -- that was a novel algorithm for computing polynomial GCDs over algebraic number fields, which I never published due to unresolved loose ends involving high-degree fields (professors encouraged me to publish it anyway -- but I didn't want to published something "unfinished"). It turns out that those "loose ends" are rather mixed up with the problem of integer factorization, which might be why I couldn't manage to tie them up. :-)
  • gtt 18y ago
    damn good for 19 years old, but as i see there aren't groundbreaking works i hoped to see. =(
    • cperciva 18y ago
      damn good for 19 years old I'm 27 years old, actually... there aren't groundbreaking works Ouch. I'd say that my shared caches side channel attack work was groundbreaking (although Shamir and his graduate students were only a few months behind me). I'd say that my projective algorithm for matching with mismatches is groundbreaking. The sqrt(5) \epsilon error bound on complex floating-point multiplication shouldn't have been groundbreaking, but apparently was -- I've never seen numerical analysts get so excited about a ~30% reduction in an error bound.
    • aswanson 18y ago
      But how do you quantify groundbreaking? A lot of research can't be qualified as such until many years later, after a field has built on the foundation laid by the originator.