A Dynamical System-based Key Equation for Decoding One-Point Algebraic-Geometry Codes
Ramamonjy Andriamifidisoa, Rufine Marius Lalasoa, Toussaint Joseph, Rabeherimanana

TL;DR
This paper introduces a dynamical system framework for decoding one-point algebraic-geometry codes, showing that the syndrome array satisfies Cauchy's equations and that the Berlekamp-Massey-Sakata algorithm effectively solves these equations.
Contribution
It develops a novel dynamical system approach to decoding algebraic-geometry codes, linking syndrome arrays to Cauchy's equations and analyzing the algorithm's role.
Findings
Syndrome array is a linear recurring sequence.
Syndrome array solves Cauchy's homogeneous equations.
BMS algorithm solves these equations within the dynamical system context.
Abstract
A closer look at linear recurring sequences allowed us to define the multiplication of a univariate polynomial and a sequence, viewed as a power series with another variable, resulting in another sequence. Extending this operation, one gets the multiplication of matrices of multivariate polynomials and vectors of powers series. A dynamical system, according to U. Oberst is then the kernel of the linear mapping of modules defined by a polynomial matrix by this operation. Applying these tools in the decoding of the so-called one point algebraic-geometry codes, after showing that the syndrome array, which is the general transform of the error in a received word is a linear recurring sequence, we construct a dynamical system. We then prove that this array is the solution of Cauchy's homogeneous equations with respect to the dynamical system. The aim of the Berlekamp-Massey-Sakata Algorithm…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsCoding theory and cryptography · Cryptographic Implementations and Security · graph theory and CDMA systems
A Dynamical System-based Key Equation for Decoding One-Point Algebraic-Geometry Codes
Ramamonjy ANDRIAMIFIDISOA
Rufine Marius LALASOA
Toussaint Joseph RABEHERIMANANA
Abstract
A closer look at linear recurring sequences allowed us to define the multiplication of a univariate polynomial and a sequence, viewed as a power series with another variable, resulting in another sequence. Extending this operation, one gets the multiplication of matrices of multivariate polynomials and vectors of powers series. A dynamical system, according to U. Oberst is then the kernel of the linear mapping of modules defined by a polynomial matrix by this operation. Applying these tools in the decoding of the so-called one point algebraic-geometry codes, after showing that the syndrome array, which is the general transform of the error in a received word is a linear recurring sequence, we construct a dynamical system. We then prove that this array is the solution of Cauchy’s homogeneous equations with respect to the dynamical system. The aim of the Berlekamp-Massey-Sakata Algorithm in the decoding process being the determination of the syndrome array, we have proved that in fact, this algorithm solves the Cauchy’s homogeneous equations with respect to a dynamical system.
Contents
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Oberst’s algebraic dynamical systems and the Cauchy’s homogeneous problem
- 3 On point algebraic-geometry codes
- 4 Cauchy’s equations for the syndrome array
1 Introduction
S. Sakata, in [11, 12], generalized the famous Berlekamp-Massey algorithm ([9]) to the two and multidimensional case. The result was the (again) famous Berlekamp-Massey-Sakata (BMS) algorithm, whose aim is to find a Gröbner basis of the set of characteristic polynomials of a multidimensional sequence. He also used the algorithm to decode algebraic-geometry (AG) codes ([13, 14]). The main difficulties is that Sakata’s papers involves many difficult notations and calculations.
Heegard and Saints ([7]) gave a shorter and clearer version of this algorithm, and explained that, in the framework of the decoding process, the algorithm computes a sufficiently number of terms of the syndrome array and construct sets of polynomials which “converges” to a Gröbner basis, which allows the calculation of the syndrome array.
Since then, the BMS algorithm has been refined and widely used by many authors, see [2, 4, 5, 8, 15], and also D. Augot, “Les codes algébriques principaux et leur décodage”, Journées nationales du calcul formel. Luminy, mai 2010 and J. Bertomieux and J. C. Faugère, “In-depth comparison of the Berlekamp-Massey-Sakata and the Scalar-FGLM algorithms: the non adaptive variants”,
arXiv:1709.07168 [cs.SC] (2017).
Therefore, due to its importance, we present here a new explanation of the BMS algorithm, in the framework of the decoding process of one point algebraic-geometry codes, as in [7]. To construct these codes, one starts from a smooth irreducible projective curve which have a unique point only at the hyperplane at infinity, and a finite set of points of the curve, distinct from the point at infinity. The code is the defined as evaluations of certain rational functions ((14) and (15)) on the curve on the set of points ((17)). The conditions these functions have to satisfy is that they have a unique pole, which is the point at the infinity, and moreover, the order of this pole is less than an appropriate number, which satisfies an inequality involving the genus of the curve and the number of evaluation points ((16)).
An important tool we use is the general transform (Definition (20)). The crucial starting point of our result is that the general transform of the error in a received word is a linear recurring sequence (Corollary 2). Here is where the notion of dynamical system can be introduced : the orthogonal of the syndrome array is a polynomial module, and therefore has a Gröbner basis. We consider the dynamical system defined by this basis.
We prove in our main theorem (Theorem 1) that the syndrome array of a received word is the solution of the *Cauchy’s homogeneous problem *(Definition 2) with respect to the above dynamical system, under the input/output representation ((9) and (26)), with an appropriate initial data, defined on a “Delta-set”((24)).
Our theorem provides a new equation for the decoding problem. We hope that our equation is a good starting point for understanding the BMS algorithm and decoding one point AG codes because it provides a clean and elegant algebraic presentation of the algorithm and the decoding problem.
This paper is organized as follows: in section 2, we introduce Oberst’s dynamical systems theory and the Cauchy’s homogeneous problem. In section 3, we present results about projective curves and one-point algebraic-geometry codes. In the last section 4, we state and prove our main theorem.
As we already mentioned in the abstract, the simple notion of *linear recurring sequence * is useful to understand the operation denoted by “” in Section 2. A sequence of elements of a commutative field is said to be a linear recurring sequence (LRS) if the following equality holds:
[TABLE]
where is an integer, for with . Using equation (1), we have that
[TABLE]
so that we can calculate using the previous terms of the sequence, which are .
We observe that the left hand side of (1) is the -th term of a new sequence of elements of . Denoting this sequence by , we have
[TABLE]
Now, construct the univariate polynomial
[TABLE]
and write the sequences and as power series in another variable, say :
[TABLE]
We say that is the product of and and write
[TABLE]
Using (2), we have
[TABLE]
(compare with (5)). The polynomial is called a characteristic polynomial of the sequence .
2 Oberst’s algebraic dynamical systems and the Cauchy’s homogeneous problem
Let be a commutative field. For an integer , let and distinct variables. The letter (resp. ) will denote the set of variables (resp. )). For , we define (resp. ) as the product
[TABLE]
Let be the -vector space of the polynomials with the variables and entries in . An element of can be uniquely written as
[TABLE]
where except for a finite number of ’s. We fix a monomial ordering on , ([3, 10]) which is then a well ordering. For a non-zero element , we define the leading exponent of by
[TABLE]
Let be -vector space of the formal power series with the variables and entries in . An element of can be uniquely written as
[TABLE]
where for all .
For integers , the set of matrices with rows and columns with entries in is denoted by . An element is of the form
[TABLE]
where for and . With the multiplication by polynomials as external operation of on , this latter becomes -module. The notation (resp. ) will be for the set of polynomials with one row and columns (resp. power series in with rows and one column).
The external operation, (also called multiplication) of on is defined by
[TABLE]
This operation provides with a -module structure. The set becomes a -module too, with the external operation
[TABLE]
More generally, given , the following mapping, also denoted by , is a -linear mapping of modules
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
is -linear ([1, 10]. Note that this expression of is similar to that of the usual matrix-vector multiplication). Its kernel is then a -submodule of . This legitimates the following definition:
Definition 1** (Oberst, [10]).**
An algebraic dynamical system (or simply a system) is a -submodule of of the form
[TABLE]
where and also denotes the -linear mapping of -modules defined by (8).
The integer is the dimension of the system. Willems treated the one-dimensional case only. An element of a system is called a trajectory.
Example 1** (Linear recurring sequence).**
Take . Then is the set of univariate polynomials in and the set of power series in the unique variable . A polynomial defines the dynamical system
[TABLE]
If , then , otherwise, using (5), for , we are in the situation in (3), so that the elements of are the linear recurring sequences having as a characteristic polynomial.
For a subset of and a subset of , we define their orthogonals by
[TABLE]
is a -submodule of and is a -submodule of ([10]).
Example 2**.**
For a non-zero polynomial , the set is those of the LRS having as a characteristic polynomial. For a power series , the set is those of the characteristic polynomials of and the zero polynomial.
In [10], it is proven that every system admits an Input/Output representation
[TABLE]
where are integers with
[TABLE]
the columns of being -linearly independent with and
[TABLE]
The system written in the form (9) is called an I/O system.
Now, we need some notations for an integer , we write
[TABLE]
and denotes a subset of (If , then we identify with ). We may identify with and consider as a subset of , where is the set of mappings from to .
Definition 2** (Oberst, [10]).**
The homogeneous Cauchy problem for the I/O system (9) is the system of equations
[TABLE]
where the unknown is , the initial data being .
3 On point algebraic-geometry codes
For algebraic geometry, we refer to [3, 6] and the construction of one point AG codes, we refer to [7]. We recall here the basic notations and ideas for the construction of such codes. From now on, denotes the Galois field with elements, where is a power of a positive prime integer. Let be the algebraic closure of and and integer.
We write as in section 2. We will use the polynomial rings and , where is another variable. We denote by the -dimensional projective space over . An element of is of the form , where . The hyperplane at infinity is the set of the points of the form . One may then write (up to an isomorphism) , and identify a point with the point .
We will consider a smooth irreducible projective curve *defined over
*. It is an affine variety of dimension , defined by
[TABLE]
where is a set of homogeneous polynomials of . The ideal of is
[TABLE]
The coordinate ring of is the ring
[TABLE]
The is an integral domain and its field of fractions is called the *field of rational functions *on and denoted by . We may write
[TABLE]
The curve is constructed from a smooth irreducible affine curve defined over , which is of the form
[TABLE]
where is a set of polynomials in . The ideal of is
[TABLE]
The terminology “ (or ) defined over ” means that the ideal is generated by polynomials in . As in (14) and (15), we define the coordinate ring (resp. the field of rational functions) of :
[TABLE]
The field of rational functions is birationally equivalent to , so we may use this latter only. Moreover, the projective curve we consider will have a unique point lying at the hyperplane at infinity and is in special position with respect to . Let be an integer verifying
[TABLE]
where is the genus of . Let be the set of the functions on which have a unique pole at , of order less than .
Let a set of points of . The code is the evaluation of the functions of the vector space
[TABLE]
and its dual is
[TABLE]
There exists such that for a monomial , the *pole order *of at is
[TABLE]
thus for . We may define the monomial order
[TABLE]
A generating family of is then
[TABLE]
with , where . As a consequence, one has a much simpler form of the code :
[TABLE]
Now, we use the sets and , defined as in Section 2, using the field .
Definition 3** ([7]).**
The generalized transform is
[TABLE]
This transform defines an -injective linear mapping.
Now, we consider the situation in which a codeword of our code has been sent through a communication channel. The received word, say is not necessarily equal to , because of a possible error produced by the channel. We may write
[TABLE]
Of course, the receiver does not know either or . The problem is to find in order to know . Instead of finding directly, one constructs the syndrome array.
Definition 4** ([7]).**
The syndrome array is
[TABLE]
Definition 5** ([7]).**
The errors locator ideal is
[TABLE]
We are going to show that if , then , which means that is a linear recurring sequence (1). Using (5), this yields
[TABLE]
where . For this purpose, we will need the following lemma:
Lemma 1** ([7]).**
For an AG code, one has
[TABLE]
*where .
We then have what we need :
Corollary 1**.**
*If , then .
Proof.
If where
[TABLE]
then the polynomial
[TABLE]
is non-zero and verifies
[TABLE]
Thus and by lemma 1, it follows that .∎∎
We have obtained what we need :
Corollary 2**.**
. The syndrome array is a linear recurring sequence.
4 Cauchy’s equations for the syndrome array
By Corollary 1, if , the ideal is non zero. Let be the partial order defined on by
[TABLE]
for and . Then has a Gröbner basis (with respect to the monomial order in Section 2) where for ([3, 10]). Consider the “Delta-sets” ([5, 7, 11])
[TABLE]
and the set
[TABLE]
Since is a Gröbner basis of , we have
[TABLE]
so that
[TABLE]
([3, 7, 10]). Let be the matrix
[TABLE]
and consider the system
[TABLE]
The (unique) column of the matrix is obviously -linearly independent, where is the field of fractions of . Thus, according to 9, is a I/O system, with and . Therefore, we may, as in 2, consider the Cauchy’s homogeneous equations with respect to .
Here is our main theorem:
Theorem 1**.**
*The syndrome is the unique solution of the Cauchy’s homogeneous equations
:*
[TABLE]
*where is an arbitrary element.
Proof.
We are going to prove that (27) is verified by all element of , hence true for the particular case . The first equation of (27) follows from the construction of . Now, write . Each trajectory of is then uniquely determined by its restriction to , which is . Indeed, suppose that is known and is equal to for . We are going to calculate by nœtherian or transfinite induction (see [10]) on . Let . Using (25), there exists such that is an entry with respect to , i.e. there exists such that with . Since , we then have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
But, since
[TABLE]
and by the choice of , we necessarily have . Thus, is already known and can be calculated by (29) for . Now, let and suppose, by the recurrence hypothesis that is already calculated for with . Using again (25) there exists and such that , with . As in (29), we have
[TABLE]
and is already known by the recurrence hypothesis, since we have . Thus can be uniquely calculated by(30). Therefore, by nœtherian recurrence, we can calculate for . ∎
Now, consider the one dimensional case . Let :
be the generalized transform of the error ,
be the characteristic polynomial of and ,
.
Then and are of the following forms
[TABLE]
and we have a simpler version of lemma 27:
Every element is the unique solution of the Cauchy’s equations
[TABLE]
We can directly calculate with and . Indeed, write with et . We have for . For , we have :
[TABLE]
and this defines using , with .∎
We may consider (27) as the fundamental equation which lies behind the BMS algorithm in the decoding process. However, at the beginning, the matrix in (27), is of course unknown, because it is constructed from the unknown syndrome . But, by (21), we have . Using (19) and (20), we have whenever (where also denotes the coefficient of the power series with respect to ). Let be the set
[TABLE]
We then have for , so that is known on the set only since it is equal to and is known.
The general idea of the BMS algorithm is to use these known terms of to construct some polynomials, which are valid recurrence relations for theses terms. Then, using these polynomials, the algorithm calculates more terms of and so on. Finally, the algorithm finds a Gröbner basis of the ideal , which, in turn, by (27), allows to calculate , and , using the inverse of the transform.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] R. Andriamifidisoa and H. Randriambolasata, ALGEBRAIC ADJOINT OF THE POLYNOMIALS-POLYNOMIAL MATRIX MULTIPLICATION, Journal of Algebra and Related Topics Vol. 5, No 2, (2017), pp 25-33.
- 2[2] M. Bras-Amorós and M. E. O’Sullivan, From the euclidean algorithm for solving a key equation for dual Reed-Solomon codes to the Berlekamp-Massey algorithm. Applied Algebra, Algebraic Algorithms and Error-Correcting Codes (2009).
- 3[3] D. Cox, J. Little, and D. O’Shea, Ideals, Varieties and Algorithms: An Introduction to computational Geometry and commutative Algebras. 2nd Edition, Springer, 1997.
- 4[4] D. Cox, J. Little, and D. O’Shea, Using Algebraic Geometry. 2nd Edition, Springer, 2005.
- 5[5] J. C. Faugère and C. Mou, Sparse FGLM algorithms. J. Symb. Comput.(2016).
- 6[6] W. Fulton, Algebraic Curves: An Introduction to Algebraic Geometry, Retwood City, CA; Addison-Wesley, 1989.
- 7[7] C. Heegard and K. Saints, Algebraic-Geometry Codes and Multidimensional Cyclic Codes: A Unified Theory and Algorithms for Decoding using Gröbner Bases. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, 41 , 1733–1751 (1995).
- 8[8] M. Kuijper, Berlekamp-Massey Algorithm, Error-correction, Keystream and Modeling. Dynamical Systems, Control, Coding, Computer Vision. Springer (1999).
