<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Other talks on Antoine Leudière</title>
    <link>https://cspages.ucalgary.ca/~antoine.leudiere1/talks/other/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Other talks on Antoine Leudière</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://cspages.ucalgary.ca/~antoine.leudiere1/talks/other/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Castles of numbers, and a bit of rethinking</title>
      <link>https://cspages.ucalgary.ca/~antoine.leudiere1/talks/other/2025-pims-pdf/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://cspages.ucalgary.ca/~antoine.leudiere1/talks/other/2025-pims-pdf/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;In number theory, we often consider a generalization of integers called&#xA;algebraic numbers. Their definition is rather elementary, but their&#xA;classification is nothing but. Algebraic numbers come in families, and we can&#xA;attach each family an invariant measuring its size: the castle. Kronecker&#xA;proved that an algebraic integer with castle strictly less than one is zero,&#xA;and that an algebraic integer with castle exactly one is a root of unity. The&#xA;classification of algebraic numbers with castle less than a prescribed constant&#xA;is technical, but we managed to derive it for cyclotomic integers (a subclass&#xA;of algebraic numbers) with castle less than 5.01, solving a conjecture of R. M.&#xA;Robinson opened in 1965.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Abstract nonsense in number theory: replacing integers by polynomials</title>
      <link>https://cspages.ucalgary.ca/~antoine.leudiere1/talks/other/2025-pims-journee-post_docs/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://cspages.ucalgary.ca/~antoine.leudiere1/talks/other/2025-pims-journee-post_docs/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;In this short talk, we will brush a somewhat unpleasant state of affairs: for&#xA;many applications, it is actually easier to use polynomials (with coefficients&#xA;in a finite field) than integers.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Examples include:&#xA;-Factorization: thousands of large polynomials (with coefficients in a finite&#xA;field) are factored everyday in different cryptographic protocols, while&#xA;factorizing a single 1024 bit number without obvious factors would take&#xA;hundreds of core-years.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Riemann hypothesis: its analogue for function fields (the field&#xA;extensions that contain polynomials instead of integers), is a theorem.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Ultimately, this has to do with geometry: integers are constants, while&#xA;polynomials can be seen as functions acting on a curve. We will explain how one&#xA;can naturally go from numbers to polynomials, and mention my principal topic of&#xA;interest: Drinfeld modules.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
