Can you prove that my candidate PRP test for Wagstaff numbers (based on Elliptic Curve Primality Proving for Fermat numbers) is a true Primality Test?

48 Views Asked by At

The test is explained and described in the forum of the GIMPS project: https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=28658

In short: $$x_1=W_3=3 \ , \ x_{j+1} = \frac{x_j^4+2x_j^2+1}{4(x_j^3-x_j)}$$

$$\text{If } \ x_{q-1} \ \equiv \ -1/3 \pmod{W_q} \ , \ \text{then } W_q = \frac{2^q+1}{3} \text{ is PRobably Prime} .$$

This candidate PRP test for Wagstaff numbers ($(2^q+1)/3$ with $q$ prime) is inspired by the following primality test for Fermat numbers proved by Denomme-Savin and Tsumura by means of the Elliptic Curves theory:

$$x_1=F_1=5 \ , \ x_{j+1} = \frac{x_j^4+2x_j^2+1}{4(x_j^3-x_j)}$$

$$\text{If } \ x_{2^{n-1}} \equiv -1 \pmod{F_n} \ , \ \text{then } F_n = 2^{2^n}+1 \text{ is prime} .$$

See Posts #1, #4 and #5 for all the details.

See Post #1 for the context.

See Post #4 for the final version of the test.

See Post #5 for the final version of the Pari/gp code.