Minimum distance between polynomials in ring-LWE
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Let $R_q=mathbb{Z}_q[x]/langle f(x)rangle$ where $f(x)=x^n+1$, as in the ring-LWE problem.
Let $a(x)$ be chosen uniformly at random from $R_q$.
Question: Is there any theorem that lower bounds the distance between any two polynomials of the form $a(x)s_1(s)$ and $a(x)s_2(x)$?
In other words, what is the value of $d$ such that $$||a(x)s_1(x)-a(x)s_2(x)||geq d$$ except with negligible probability, for any two polynomials $s_1(x),s_2(x)in R_q$ and where $||cdot||$ is the usual $L_2$ norm?
lattice-crypto lwe ring-lwe
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Let $R_q=mathbb{Z}_q[x]/langle f(x)rangle$ where $f(x)=x^n+1$, as in the ring-LWE problem.
Let $a(x)$ be chosen uniformly at random from $R_q$.
Question: Is there any theorem that lower bounds the distance between any two polynomials of the form $a(x)s_1(s)$ and $a(x)s_2(x)$?
In other words, what is the value of $d$ such that $$||a(x)s_1(x)-a(x)s_2(x)||geq d$$ except with negligible probability, for any two polynomials $s_1(x),s_2(x)in R_q$ and where $||cdot||$ is the usual $L_2$ norm?
lattice-crypto lwe ring-lwe
Hello. It is a good question, but the $L_2$ norm is defined over vectors and it is not clear how you are embedding the polynomials in a vector space. Are you just representing the polynomials as vectors with their coefficients? (So, for instance, $2x^3 -1$ becomes the vector $(2, 0, 0, -1)$).
– Hilder Vítor Lima Pereira
2 days ago
Yes, I am thinking of the canonical embedding
– P.B.
2 days ago
Well, the canonical embedding is the one that uses isomorphisms to embed the polynomials. The one I've described is the coefficient embedding...
– Hilder Vítor Lima Pereira
2 days ago
Sorry. I mean the coefficient embedding then
– P.B.
2 days ago
How do you define "negligible probability" in this case?
– kodlu
2 days ago
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Let $R_q=mathbb{Z}_q[x]/langle f(x)rangle$ where $f(x)=x^n+1$, as in the ring-LWE problem.
Let $a(x)$ be chosen uniformly at random from $R_q$.
Question: Is there any theorem that lower bounds the distance between any two polynomials of the form $a(x)s_1(s)$ and $a(x)s_2(x)$?
In other words, what is the value of $d$ such that $$||a(x)s_1(x)-a(x)s_2(x)||geq d$$ except with negligible probability, for any two polynomials $s_1(x),s_2(x)in R_q$ and where $||cdot||$ is the usual $L_2$ norm?
lattice-crypto lwe ring-lwe
Let $R_q=mathbb{Z}_q[x]/langle f(x)rangle$ where $f(x)=x^n+1$, as in the ring-LWE problem.
Let $a(x)$ be chosen uniformly at random from $R_q$.
Question: Is there any theorem that lower bounds the distance between any two polynomials of the form $a(x)s_1(s)$ and $a(x)s_2(x)$?
In other words, what is the value of $d$ such that $$||a(x)s_1(x)-a(x)s_2(x)||geq d$$ except with negligible probability, for any two polynomials $s_1(x),s_2(x)in R_q$ and where $||cdot||$ is the usual $L_2$ norm?
lattice-crypto lwe ring-lwe
lattice-crypto lwe ring-lwe
asked 2 days ago
P.B.
1376
1376
Hello. It is a good question, but the $L_2$ norm is defined over vectors and it is not clear how you are embedding the polynomials in a vector space. Are you just representing the polynomials as vectors with their coefficients? (So, for instance, $2x^3 -1$ becomes the vector $(2, 0, 0, -1)$).
– Hilder Vítor Lima Pereira
2 days ago
Yes, I am thinking of the canonical embedding
– P.B.
2 days ago
Well, the canonical embedding is the one that uses isomorphisms to embed the polynomials. The one I've described is the coefficient embedding...
– Hilder Vítor Lima Pereira
2 days ago
Sorry. I mean the coefficient embedding then
– P.B.
2 days ago
How do you define "negligible probability" in this case?
– kodlu
2 days ago
add a comment |
Hello. It is a good question, but the $L_2$ norm is defined over vectors and it is not clear how you are embedding the polynomials in a vector space. Are you just representing the polynomials as vectors with their coefficients? (So, for instance, $2x^3 -1$ becomes the vector $(2, 0, 0, -1)$).
– Hilder Vítor Lima Pereira
2 days ago
Yes, I am thinking of the canonical embedding
– P.B.
2 days ago
Well, the canonical embedding is the one that uses isomorphisms to embed the polynomials. The one I've described is the coefficient embedding...
– Hilder Vítor Lima Pereira
2 days ago
Sorry. I mean the coefficient embedding then
– P.B.
2 days ago
How do you define "negligible probability" in this case?
– kodlu
2 days ago
Hello. It is a good question, but the $L_2$ norm is defined over vectors and it is not clear how you are embedding the polynomials in a vector space. Are you just representing the polynomials as vectors with their coefficients? (So, for instance, $2x^3 -1$ becomes the vector $(2, 0, 0, -1)$).
– Hilder Vítor Lima Pereira
2 days ago
Hello. It is a good question, but the $L_2$ norm is defined over vectors and it is not clear how you are embedding the polynomials in a vector space. Are you just representing the polynomials as vectors with their coefficients? (So, for instance, $2x^3 -1$ becomes the vector $(2, 0, 0, -1)$).
– Hilder Vítor Lima Pereira
2 days ago
Yes, I am thinking of the canonical embedding
– P.B.
2 days ago
Yes, I am thinking of the canonical embedding
– P.B.
2 days ago
Well, the canonical embedding is the one that uses isomorphisms to embed the polynomials. The one I've described is the coefficient embedding...
– Hilder Vítor Lima Pereira
2 days ago
Well, the canonical embedding is the one that uses isomorphisms to embed the polynomials. The one I've described is the coefficient embedding...
– Hilder Vítor Lima Pereira
2 days ago
Sorry. I mean the coefficient embedding then
– P.B.
2 days ago
Sorry. I mean the coefficient embedding then
– P.B.
2 days ago
How do you define "negligible probability" in this case?
– kodlu
2 days ago
How do you define "negligible probability" in this case?
– kodlu
2 days ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
5
down vote
accepted
I'm assuming $n$ is a power of $2$ and that $q$ is an odd prime larger than $n$. I'm discarding the trivial case $s_1 = s_2$.
If you consider everything $mod q$, then it is most likely over the choice of $a$ that there exists $s_1 neq s_2$ such that $|a s_1 - a s_2| = sqrt{n}$. Indeed, $a$ is invertible in $R_q$ with probability about $1 - n/q$. Take $s_2 = s_1 - a^{-1}$, then you have $a s_1 - a s_2 = 1 mod q$ and the embedding norm of $1$ is $sqrt{n}$.
If you do not consider this $mod q$, i.e. you work in $R=mathbb Z[x]/⟨f(x)⟩$, then you are precisely asking for the minimal distance $lambda_1(mathfrak I)$ of the ideal lattice $mathfrak I$ generated by $a$. For such an ideal lattice, we can estimate rather precisely this minimal distance. A simple lower bound is
$lambda_1(mathfrak I) geq Delta_K^{1/2n} cdot N(a)^{1/n}$, where $N$ denotes the algebraic norm of $a$ (that is, the product of all its embeddings), and $Delta_K$ is the discriminant of field $K = mathbb Q(x)/(x^n+1)$. The reason is that the minimal vector $x$ must generate a subideal of $mathfrak I$, so $N(x) geq N(a)$, and $|x|^n geq Delta_K^{1/2} N(x)$. An upper bound is also given by Minkowski's theorem.
Shouldn't the embedding norm of 1 be 1?
– P.B.
2 days ago
Well, each embedding of 1 is one, so we are looking at the norm of (1, 1, ... 1), right ?
– LeoDucas
yesterday
So this is the canonical embedding we are talking about right? In this case, we have that $||as_1-as_2||geq sqrt{n}$? Or are you just saying that there are $s_1,s_2$ such that $||as_1-as_2||= sqrt{n}$ but there could be others $r_1,r_2$ for which the differente between $ar_1$ and $ar_2$ is even lower?
– P.B.
yesterday
There could be $0$ as well ;). BBut nothing in between indeed, at least for that particular ring.
– LeoDucas
yesterday
Thank you for your help! Can you provide me some references about these facts? It would be very useful.
– P.B.
yesterday
|
show 1 more comment
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
5
down vote
accepted
I'm assuming $n$ is a power of $2$ and that $q$ is an odd prime larger than $n$. I'm discarding the trivial case $s_1 = s_2$.
If you consider everything $mod q$, then it is most likely over the choice of $a$ that there exists $s_1 neq s_2$ such that $|a s_1 - a s_2| = sqrt{n}$. Indeed, $a$ is invertible in $R_q$ with probability about $1 - n/q$. Take $s_2 = s_1 - a^{-1}$, then you have $a s_1 - a s_2 = 1 mod q$ and the embedding norm of $1$ is $sqrt{n}$.
If you do not consider this $mod q$, i.e. you work in $R=mathbb Z[x]/⟨f(x)⟩$, then you are precisely asking for the minimal distance $lambda_1(mathfrak I)$ of the ideal lattice $mathfrak I$ generated by $a$. For such an ideal lattice, we can estimate rather precisely this minimal distance. A simple lower bound is
$lambda_1(mathfrak I) geq Delta_K^{1/2n} cdot N(a)^{1/n}$, where $N$ denotes the algebraic norm of $a$ (that is, the product of all its embeddings), and $Delta_K$ is the discriminant of field $K = mathbb Q(x)/(x^n+1)$. The reason is that the minimal vector $x$ must generate a subideal of $mathfrak I$, so $N(x) geq N(a)$, and $|x|^n geq Delta_K^{1/2} N(x)$. An upper bound is also given by Minkowski's theorem.
Shouldn't the embedding norm of 1 be 1?
– P.B.
2 days ago
Well, each embedding of 1 is one, so we are looking at the norm of (1, 1, ... 1), right ?
– LeoDucas
yesterday
So this is the canonical embedding we are talking about right? In this case, we have that $||as_1-as_2||geq sqrt{n}$? Or are you just saying that there are $s_1,s_2$ such that $||as_1-as_2||= sqrt{n}$ but there could be others $r_1,r_2$ for which the differente between $ar_1$ and $ar_2$ is even lower?
– P.B.
yesterday
There could be $0$ as well ;). BBut nothing in between indeed, at least for that particular ring.
– LeoDucas
yesterday
Thank you for your help! Can you provide me some references about these facts? It would be very useful.
– P.B.
yesterday
|
show 1 more comment
up vote
5
down vote
accepted
I'm assuming $n$ is a power of $2$ and that $q$ is an odd prime larger than $n$. I'm discarding the trivial case $s_1 = s_2$.
If you consider everything $mod q$, then it is most likely over the choice of $a$ that there exists $s_1 neq s_2$ such that $|a s_1 - a s_2| = sqrt{n}$. Indeed, $a$ is invertible in $R_q$ with probability about $1 - n/q$. Take $s_2 = s_1 - a^{-1}$, then you have $a s_1 - a s_2 = 1 mod q$ and the embedding norm of $1$ is $sqrt{n}$.
If you do not consider this $mod q$, i.e. you work in $R=mathbb Z[x]/⟨f(x)⟩$, then you are precisely asking for the minimal distance $lambda_1(mathfrak I)$ of the ideal lattice $mathfrak I$ generated by $a$. For such an ideal lattice, we can estimate rather precisely this minimal distance. A simple lower bound is
$lambda_1(mathfrak I) geq Delta_K^{1/2n} cdot N(a)^{1/n}$, where $N$ denotes the algebraic norm of $a$ (that is, the product of all its embeddings), and $Delta_K$ is the discriminant of field $K = mathbb Q(x)/(x^n+1)$. The reason is that the minimal vector $x$ must generate a subideal of $mathfrak I$, so $N(x) geq N(a)$, and $|x|^n geq Delta_K^{1/2} N(x)$. An upper bound is also given by Minkowski's theorem.
Shouldn't the embedding norm of 1 be 1?
– P.B.
2 days ago
Well, each embedding of 1 is one, so we are looking at the norm of (1, 1, ... 1), right ?
– LeoDucas
yesterday
So this is the canonical embedding we are talking about right? In this case, we have that $||as_1-as_2||geq sqrt{n}$? Or are you just saying that there are $s_1,s_2$ such that $||as_1-as_2||= sqrt{n}$ but there could be others $r_1,r_2$ for which the differente between $ar_1$ and $ar_2$ is even lower?
– P.B.
yesterday
There could be $0$ as well ;). BBut nothing in between indeed, at least for that particular ring.
– LeoDucas
yesterday
Thank you for your help! Can you provide me some references about these facts? It would be very useful.
– P.B.
yesterday
|
show 1 more comment
up vote
5
down vote
accepted
up vote
5
down vote
accepted
I'm assuming $n$ is a power of $2$ and that $q$ is an odd prime larger than $n$. I'm discarding the trivial case $s_1 = s_2$.
If you consider everything $mod q$, then it is most likely over the choice of $a$ that there exists $s_1 neq s_2$ such that $|a s_1 - a s_2| = sqrt{n}$. Indeed, $a$ is invertible in $R_q$ with probability about $1 - n/q$. Take $s_2 = s_1 - a^{-1}$, then you have $a s_1 - a s_2 = 1 mod q$ and the embedding norm of $1$ is $sqrt{n}$.
If you do not consider this $mod q$, i.e. you work in $R=mathbb Z[x]/⟨f(x)⟩$, then you are precisely asking for the minimal distance $lambda_1(mathfrak I)$ of the ideal lattice $mathfrak I$ generated by $a$. For such an ideal lattice, we can estimate rather precisely this minimal distance. A simple lower bound is
$lambda_1(mathfrak I) geq Delta_K^{1/2n} cdot N(a)^{1/n}$, where $N$ denotes the algebraic norm of $a$ (that is, the product of all its embeddings), and $Delta_K$ is the discriminant of field $K = mathbb Q(x)/(x^n+1)$. The reason is that the minimal vector $x$ must generate a subideal of $mathfrak I$, so $N(x) geq N(a)$, and $|x|^n geq Delta_K^{1/2} N(x)$. An upper bound is also given by Minkowski's theorem.
I'm assuming $n$ is a power of $2$ and that $q$ is an odd prime larger than $n$. I'm discarding the trivial case $s_1 = s_2$.
If you consider everything $mod q$, then it is most likely over the choice of $a$ that there exists $s_1 neq s_2$ such that $|a s_1 - a s_2| = sqrt{n}$. Indeed, $a$ is invertible in $R_q$ with probability about $1 - n/q$. Take $s_2 = s_1 - a^{-1}$, then you have $a s_1 - a s_2 = 1 mod q$ and the embedding norm of $1$ is $sqrt{n}$.
If you do not consider this $mod q$, i.e. you work in $R=mathbb Z[x]/⟨f(x)⟩$, then you are precisely asking for the minimal distance $lambda_1(mathfrak I)$ of the ideal lattice $mathfrak I$ generated by $a$. For such an ideal lattice, we can estimate rather precisely this minimal distance. A simple lower bound is
$lambda_1(mathfrak I) geq Delta_K^{1/2n} cdot N(a)^{1/n}$, where $N$ denotes the algebraic norm of $a$ (that is, the product of all its embeddings), and $Delta_K$ is the discriminant of field $K = mathbb Q(x)/(x^n+1)$. The reason is that the minimal vector $x$ must generate a subideal of $mathfrak I$, so $N(x) geq N(a)$, and $|x|^n geq Delta_K^{1/2} N(x)$. An upper bound is also given by Minkowski's theorem.
edited 2 days ago
Ella Rose
14.3k43775
14.3k43775
answered 2 days ago
LeoDucas
38516
38516
Shouldn't the embedding norm of 1 be 1?
– P.B.
2 days ago
Well, each embedding of 1 is one, so we are looking at the norm of (1, 1, ... 1), right ?
– LeoDucas
yesterday
So this is the canonical embedding we are talking about right? In this case, we have that $||as_1-as_2||geq sqrt{n}$? Or are you just saying that there are $s_1,s_2$ such that $||as_1-as_2||= sqrt{n}$ but there could be others $r_1,r_2$ for which the differente between $ar_1$ and $ar_2$ is even lower?
– P.B.
yesterday
There could be $0$ as well ;). BBut nothing in between indeed, at least for that particular ring.
– LeoDucas
yesterday
Thank you for your help! Can you provide me some references about these facts? It would be very useful.
– P.B.
yesterday
|
show 1 more comment
Shouldn't the embedding norm of 1 be 1?
– P.B.
2 days ago
Well, each embedding of 1 is one, so we are looking at the norm of (1, 1, ... 1), right ?
– LeoDucas
yesterday
So this is the canonical embedding we are talking about right? In this case, we have that $||as_1-as_2||geq sqrt{n}$? Or are you just saying that there are $s_1,s_2$ such that $||as_1-as_2||= sqrt{n}$ but there could be others $r_1,r_2$ for which the differente between $ar_1$ and $ar_2$ is even lower?
– P.B.
yesterday
There could be $0$ as well ;). BBut nothing in between indeed, at least for that particular ring.
– LeoDucas
yesterday
Thank you for your help! Can you provide me some references about these facts? It would be very useful.
– P.B.
yesterday
Shouldn't the embedding norm of 1 be 1?
– P.B.
2 days ago
Shouldn't the embedding norm of 1 be 1?
– P.B.
2 days ago
Well, each embedding of 1 is one, so we are looking at the norm of (1, 1, ... 1), right ?
– LeoDucas
yesterday
Well, each embedding of 1 is one, so we are looking at the norm of (1, 1, ... 1), right ?
– LeoDucas
yesterday
So this is the canonical embedding we are talking about right? In this case, we have that $||as_1-as_2||geq sqrt{n}$? Or are you just saying that there are $s_1,s_2$ such that $||as_1-as_2||= sqrt{n}$ but there could be others $r_1,r_2$ for which the differente between $ar_1$ and $ar_2$ is even lower?
– P.B.
yesterday
So this is the canonical embedding we are talking about right? In this case, we have that $||as_1-as_2||geq sqrt{n}$? Or are you just saying that there are $s_1,s_2$ such that $||as_1-as_2||= sqrt{n}$ but there could be others $r_1,r_2$ for which the differente between $ar_1$ and $ar_2$ is even lower?
– P.B.
yesterday
There could be $0$ as well ;). BBut nothing in between indeed, at least for that particular ring.
– LeoDucas
yesterday
There could be $0$ as well ;). BBut nothing in between indeed, at least for that particular ring.
– LeoDucas
yesterday
Thank you for your help! Can you provide me some references about these facts? It would be very useful.
– P.B.
yesterday
Thank you for your help! Can you provide me some references about these facts? It would be very useful.
– P.B.
yesterday
|
show 1 more comment
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcrypto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f64299%2fminimum-distance-between-polynomials-in-ring-lwe%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Hello. It is a good question, but the $L_2$ norm is defined over vectors and it is not clear how you are embedding the polynomials in a vector space. Are you just representing the polynomials as vectors with their coefficients? (So, for instance, $2x^3 -1$ becomes the vector $(2, 0, 0, -1)$).
– Hilder Vítor Lima Pereira
2 days ago
Yes, I am thinking of the canonical embedding
– P.B.
2 days ago
Well, the canonical embedding is the one that uses isomorphisms to embed the polynomials. The one I've described is the coefficient embedding...
– Hilder Vítor Lima Pereira
2 days ago
Sorry. I mean the coefficient embedding then
– P.B.
2 days ago
How do you define "negligible probability" in this case?
– kodlu
2 days ago