Lagrange Interpolation Mystery Values

142 Views Asked by At

I'm trying to test my implementation of the Shamir Secret Sharing Scheme. I'm referring to an example of Lagrange Interpolation at: https://programmingpraxis.com/2011/06/17/adi-shamirs-threshold-scheme/

Going through the example the first line follows from the equation to computer S(0), but on line 2, in the last term, the 2 multiplier from line 1 becomes a 21. Similarly on line 3, in the middle term, the 21 multiplier from line 2 becomes a 23. Despite this the final answer is correct. Could someone please explain why these changes happen and how they get to the correct answer?

Please note x$^{−1}$ denotes ModInverse in 23.

S = [22 · 2(2−14)$^{−1}$ · 21(21−14)−1] + [8 · 14(14−2)$^{−1}$ · 21(21−2)$^{−1}$] + [5 · 14(14−21)$^{−1}$ · 2(2−21)$^{−1}$] (mod 23)

= [22 · 2 · 11$^{−1}$ · 21 · 7$^{−1}$] + [8 · 14 · 12$^{−1}$ · 21 · 19$^{−1}$] + [5 · 14 · 16$^{−1}$ · 21 · 4$^{−1}$] (mod 23)

= [22 · 2 · 21 · 21 · 10] + [8 · 14 · 2 · 23 · 17] + [5 · 14 · 13 · 21 · 6] (mod 23)

= 194040 + 87584 + 114660 (mod 23)

= 396284 (mod 23)

= 17

2

There are 2 best solutions below

0
On BEST ANSWER

@moo

So Seth and I are working on this together and our issue is not with the mod inverse.

What we don’t understand is that the third term goes as follows:

[$5\cdot14\cdot$(14-21)$^{-1}$$\cdot$2$\cdot(2-21)$$^{-1}$]

[$5\cdot14\cdot(-7\equiv16mod23)$$^{-1}$$\cdot$21$\cdot(-19\equiv4mod23)$$^{-1}$]

Why does the bold faced 2 become the bold faced 21? The same is true in the second term between the following bold faced terms.

[8$\cdot$14$\cdot$12$^{-1}$$\cdot$21$\cdot$19$^{-1}$]

[8$\cdot$14$\cdot$2$\cdot$23$\cdot$17]

This sort of jump doesn't happen in the first term so we're not sure where it's coming from.

Thank you!

0
On

As @karishma-reddy-khan pointed out to me, the points being used to evaluate this expression were wrong. The final point, (21, 5) should actually be (21, 15). The Author of this post used the incorrect point in the first equation, then the correct one in the second part of his equation, hence the confusion.