[QUOTE=frmky;205542]I've done 600 curves at B1=11e7, which basically completes testing for 45 digit factors. I'll leave it running overnight, which will complete about half of t50. I suggest you move to either B1=43e6 or 11e7.[/QUOTE]

eleventy-one (111) more curves at B1=11e6, no factor.

Switching to 43e6

I have a single poly overnight (still running):
[CODE]n: 385464482250950887345614598556545458998728163612585824428623191789206319774832929187814583420579189739060976007725889789586019426724128714659532651031321
# norm 6.309575e-015 alpha -7.524281 e 3.210e-012
skew: 10113003.85
type: gnfs
c0: -442863778759910408662290488760271660295
c1: 317171992445197854256912906861496
c2: -139225858766223144829716100
c3: 4264866481789867288
c4: 2108579173839
c5: 24300
Y0: -436588702930950821490055084506
Y1: 181016282146031377
rlim: 25000000
alim: 25000000
lpbr: 29
lpba: 29
mfbr: 58
mfba: 58
rlambda: 2.6
alambda: 2.6
[/CODE]
It is the unmodified gpu .exe from the site, so it is going to be probably producing very few single polys, but that's ok: one poly is better than none.
The limits are just a ballpark from the script.

I've completed another 1200 curves at B1=11e7, which corresponds to roughly 2900 curves at 43e6, with no factor. I'll let it continue.

108@43e6, no factor.

Time to branch off this gnfs and start sieving?
The poly is quite good (call me lucky); cf. to that other thread's E for a c153 and I think that you may be convinced.

Also, I can do the algebra on it.

EDIT: It is above, -- all the same, the single one.
Running sims...
I suggest 14e, -a from 10M to 60M, with somewhat increased lims, here is the revised version:
[CODE]# sieve with 14e -a from 10M to 60M
n: 385464482250950887345614598556545458998728163612585824428623191789206319774832929187814583420579189739060976007725889789586019426724128714659532651031321
# norm 6.309575e-015 alpha -7.524281 e 3.210e-012
skew: 10113003.85
type: gnfs
c0: -442863778759910408662290488760271660295
c1: 317171992445197854256912906861496
c2: -139225858766223144829716100
c3: 4264866481789867288
c4: 2108579173839
c5: 24300
Y0: -436588702930950821490055084506
Y1: 181016282146031377
rlim: 33554430
alim: 33554430
lpbr: 29
lpba: 29
mfbr: 58
mfba: 58
rlambda: 2.6
alambda: 2.6[/CODE]

Post the polynomial. Actually I can contribute significant sieving right now, so it might make sense for me to do the LA as well just in terms of the number of relations that need to be transferred. I have a Core 2 quad free that doesn't have enough memory for a NFS@Home LA.

P.S. you could quite possibly do it in the NFS @ Home framework in a day, plus a day for the algebra. The BOINC users who wanted the 14e siever (and programmed their preferences for it) will be pleased.


[COLOR=green]P.P.S. Can you make a replicate server for this (and future aliquot) job(s) and post instructions specifically to the enthusiasts of this forum? that would be a nice automatization of what happens anyway? Aliquot @ Home? :-)[/COLOR]

[QUOTE=Batalov;205588]P.S. you could quite possibly do it in the NFS @ Home framework in a day, plus a day for the algebra. The BOINC users who wanted the 14e siever (and programmed their preferences for it) will be pleased.[/QUOTE]

Too much overhead. It would actually take a few days anyway. Many users queue a day or two of work, so their queues would need to clear before even starting on this one.

Edit: It looks like sieving on the cluster here would take about 2 days. I'll reserve the second half of the range, 35M-60M.

[QUOTE=jrk;205529]I will try as well; reserving -np 48060,60000.[/QUOTE]

After 20.5 hours I found 41841 polys but the best was only E 3.064e-12.

I've stopped it now. Serge's poly is in the range that I was expecting for a good poly (~3.15e-12 to 3.5e-12) based on the available data. So it is good enough.

[QUOTE=Batalov;205584]I suggest 14e, -a from 10M to 60M, with somewhat increased lims, here is the revised version:[/QUOTE]

That range of Q seems to be too large. My trial suggests that Q=10M to 40M would be sufficient with the parameters you gave: 29bit lp, 25bit sp and siever 14e.

[code]Warning: lowering FB_bound to 9999999.
total yield: 1516, q=10001009 (0.07294 sec/rel)
Warning: lowering FB_bound to 14999999.
total yield: 1676, q=15001001 (0.07745 sec/rel)
Warning: lowering FB_bound to 19999999.
total yield: 2258, q=20001001 (0.07231 sec/rel)
Warning: lowering FB_bound to 24999999.
total yield: 2107, q=25001029 (0.07948 sec/rel)
Warning: lowering FB_bound to 29999999.
total yield: 1711, q=30001003 (0.08549 sec/rel)
total yield: 1770, q=35001013 (0.08701 sec/rel)
total yield: 1753, q=40001021 (0.08816 sec/rel)
[/code]

If frmky is committed to doing Q=35M to 60M already then perhaps only another 5M range of the lower end would finish it off.

Yes, these are exactly the numbers that I've got too, averaging (conservatively) to 1.7/q-range. I expect 25% duplications and I targeted 60M unique relations (for a nice matrix). Factor in some drop-offs.

Greg will produce most relations and it is natural for him to do algebra, so it is for him to say when to stop. Something like 46M unique will be a minimum, so 10-40M range might have been barely enough (if duplication is lower than 25% which I doubt for 14e), but it is more overhead to spread with a tight estimate, then filter and say "sieve some more, guys". (Tight sieving also leads to [URL="http://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=204759"]this[/URL].)