Do you know any algorithm that calculates the factorial after modulus efficiently?

For example, I want to program:

for(i=0; i<5; i++)
  sum += factorial(p-i) % p;

But, p is a big number (prime) for applying factorial directly $(p \leq 10^ 8)$.

In Python, this task is really easy, but i really want to know how to optimize.

  • 6
    $\begingroup$ Seems like the problem wants you to use Wilson's theorem. For prime $p$, $(p-1)! = -1 \mod p$. So without using any programming language: the answer is $100$. Perhaps you would like to generalize your problem? $\endgroup$ – Aryabhata Apr 25 '12 at 3:42
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Can you state the problem more clearly? Do you want to compute (X!) (mod (X+1)), or the more general (X!) (mod Y)? And I presume that factorial(100!) doesn't really mean you want to apply the factorial function twice. $\endgroup$ – Keith Thompson Apr 25 '12 at 5:40
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Even if you didn't have Wilson's theorem, you do have that $(mn)\bmod p=(m\bmod p)(n\bmod p)$, which would at least help avoid overflow issues. $\endgroup$ – Dave Clarke Apr 25 '12 at 6:40
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ Note that Wilson's Theorem applies only when $p$ is prime. Your question does not state that $p$ is prime, so what you've written is not correct. $\endgroup$ – Dave Clarke Apr 25 '12 at 10:41
  • 10
    $\begingroup$ This looks oddly familiar :) $\endgroup$ – hammar Apr 27 '12 at 22:33

(This answer was initially posted by the asker jonaprieto inside the question.)

I remember Wilson's theorem, and I noticed little things:

In the above program, it is better if I write: $$\begin{align} (p-1)! &\equiv -1 &\pmod p\\ (p-2)! &\equiv (p-1)! (p-1)^ {-1} \equiv \bf{1} &\pmod p\\ (p-3)! &\equiv (p-2)! (p-2)^ {-1} \equiv \bf{(p-2)^{-1}} &\pmod p\\ (p-4)! &\equiv (p-3)! (p-3)^ {-1} \equiv \bf{(p-2)^{-1}} \bf{(p-3)^{-1}} &\pmod p\\ \ (p-5)! &\equiv (p-4)! (p-4)^ {-1} \equiv \bf{(p-2)^{-1}} \bf{(p-3)^{-1}}\bf{(p-4)^{-1}} &\pmod p\\ \end{align}$$

And you can find $(p-i)^{-1}$ because $\operatorname{gcd}(p, p-i) = 1$, so with the extended Euclidian algorithm you can find the value of $(p-i)^{-1}$, that is the inverse modulus.

You can view the same congruences too, like to: $$\begin{align*} (p-5)! &\equiv (p-24)^{-1}&\pmod p\\ (p-4)! &\equiv (p+6)^{-1}&\pmod p\\ (p-3)! &\equiv (p-2)^{-1} &\pmod p\\ (p-2)! &\equiv 1&\pmod p\\ (p-1)! &\equiv -1&\pmod p\\ \end{align*} $$ so, the sum is equal: $$ (-24)^{-1}+(6)^{-1} +(-2)^{-1}$$ and if you factorize in the beginning the factorials you get $$ 8\cdot (-24)^{-1} \pmod p$$ And, voila, inverse modulus is more efficient than factorials.

  • $\begingroup$ So basically $(p-k)! \equiv (p + (k-1)!(-1)^k)^{-1} \pmod p$. Neat! $\endgroup$ – Thomas Ahle May 11 '13 at 16:01
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry but when I factorize $ (−24)^{−1}+6^{−1}+(−2)^{−1} $, I get : $$ 9\cdot(-24)^{-1}=\frac{-3}{8} $$ $\endgroup$ – user8193 May 15 '13 at 22:02

The example that you are posting is very closely related to Euler problem #381. So I will post an answer that doesn't solve the Euler problem. I will post how you can calculate factorials modulo a prime.

So: How to calculate n! modulo p?

Quick observation: If n ≥ p, then n! has a factor p, so the result is 0. Very quick. And if we ignore the requirement that p should be a prime then let q be the smallest prime factor of p, and n! modulo p is 0 if n ≥ q. There's also not much reason to require that p is a prime to answer your question.

Now in your example (n - i)! for 1 ≤ i ≤ 5 came up. You don't have to calculate five factorials: You calculate (n - 5)!, multiply by (n - 4) go get (n - 4)!, multiply by (n - 3) to get (n - 3)! etc. This reduces the work by almost a factor 5. Don't solve the problem literally.

The question is how to calculate n! modulo m. The obvious way is to calculate n!, a number with roughly n log n decimal digits, and calculate the remainder modulo p. That's hard work. Question: How can we get this result quicker? By not doing the obvious thing.

We know that ((a * b * c) modulo p = (((a * b) modulo p) * c) modulo p.

To calculate n!, we would normally start with x = 1, then multiply x by 1, 2, 3, ... n. Using the modulo formula, we calculate n! modulo p without calculating n!, by starting with x = 1, and then for i = 1, 2, 3, .., n we replace x with (x * i) modulo p.

We always have x < p and i < n, so we only need enough precision to calculate x * p, not the much higher precision to calculate n!. So to calculate n! modulo p for p ≥ 2 we take the following steps:

Step 1: Find the smallest prime factor q of p. If n ≥ q then the result is 0.
Step 2: Let x = 1, then for 1 ≤ i ≤ n replace x with (x * i) modulo p, and x is the result. 

(Some answers mention Wilson's theorem, which only answers the question in the very special case of the example given, and is very useful to solve Euler problem #381, but in general isn't useful to solve the question that was asked).

| cite | improve this answer | |

This is my implementation use of the wilson's theorem:

The factMOD function is the one to call to compute (n!) % MOD when MOD-n is little against n.

Do someone know an other efficient approach when it's not the case (e.g: n=1e6 and MOD=1e9+7) ?

ll powmod(ll a, ll b){//a^b % MOD
  ll x=1,y=a;
      x*=y; if(x>=MOD)x%=MOD;
    y*=y; if(y>=MOD)y%=MOD;
  return x;
ll InverseEuler(ll n){//modular inverse of n
  return powmod(n,MOD-2);
ll factMOD(ll n){ //n! % MOD efficient when MOD-n<n
   ll res=1,i;
   for(i=1; i<MOD-n; i++){
      res= -res +MOD;
  return res%MOD;
| cite | improve this answer | |
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Code isn't really on-topic, here. A description of the algorithm is much more useful because it doesn't require people to understand whatever language you decided to write your code in, and because actual implementations are often optimized in a way that makes them harder to understand. And please ask your questions as separate questions, rather than in your answer. Stack Exchange is a question and answer site, not a discussion board, and questions are hard to find if they're hidden amont the answers. Thanks! $\endgroup$ – David Richerby Nov 27 '14 at 9:38

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.