Unsupported Elements
\nThe Euclidean algorithm can be thought of as constructing a sequence of non-negative integers that begins with the two given integers
and
and will eventually terminate with the integer zero:
with
. The integer
will then be the GCD and we can state
. The algorithm indicates how to construct the intermediate remainders
via division-with-remainder on the preceding pair
by finding an integer quotient
so that:
\n\n
\n\nBecause the sequence of non-negative integers
is strictly decreasing, it eventually must terminate. In other words, since
for every
, and each
is an integer that is strictly smaller than the preceding
, there eventually cannot be a non-negative integer smaller than zero, and hence the algorithm must terminate. In fact, the algorithm will always terminate at the n-th step with
equal to zero.[15]
\n\nTo illustrate, suppose the GCD of 1071 and 462 is requested. The sequence is initially
and in order to find
, we need to find integers
and
such that:
\n\n
.
\n\nThis is the quotient
since
. This determines
and so the sequence is now
. The next step is to continue the sequence to find
by finding integers
and
such that:
\n\n
.
\n\nThis is the quotient
since
. This determines
and so the sequence is now
. The next step is to continue the sequence to find
by finding integers
and
such that:
\n\n
.
\n\nThis is the quotient
since
. This determines
and so the sequence is completed as
as no further non-negative integer smaller than
can be found. The penultimate remainder
is therefore the requested GCD:
\n\n
\n\nWe can generalize slightly by dropping any ordering requirement on the initial two values
and
. If
, the algorithm may continue and trivially find that
as the sequence of remainders will be
. If
, then we can also continue since
, suggesting the next remainder should be
itself, and the sequence is
. Normally, this would be invalid because it breaks the requirement
but now we have
by construction, so the requirement is automatically satisfied and the Euclidean algorithm can continue as normal. Therefore, dropping any ordering between the first two integers does not affect the conclusion that the sequence must eventually terminate because the next remainder will always satisfy
and everything continues as above. The only modifications that need to be made are that
only for
, and that the sub-sequence of non-negative integers
for
is strictly decreasing, therefore excluding
from both statements.
\n\n