![]() |
My best find to date barely cracked 9.6. Not worth posting. I was hoping to find a 1.1 but anything over 1 would be great at this point. Should finish searching 1.5-2M in 2 days.
|
Another spin-off of RichD's poly:
[code] # norm 2.167277e-017 alpha -6.062357 e 1.025e-013 rroots 3 skew: 23528909.66 c0: -1563793939281664638557149183907639400895270 c1: 320665474225619412720776737995705467 c2: -8993053813069707104254738362 c3: -826078846350604975331 c4: 26944820395066 c5: 843030 Y0: -40058058788002667683247195772196923 Y1: 170451191305026917 [/code] |
I don't see any reason to test sieve root-opts that score worse than the initial poly hit! I'm testing no more than 5 polys, period.
I ran 10M-11.45M the last couple days, -npr'ing now. If nothing turns up, I'll proceed to test-sieving my 1.006 poly for parameters, then Rich's 1.04, then 2-3 best of Max's. Obv, if something good turns up I'll have a look! I did GNFS172 and 175 with 15e/33 recently; raw relations needed was surprisingly low, but both would have been easier as 32LP (the 172 was 33 by accident, while 175 was intentional to see how relations-needed scaled from 172). I expect that 15/32 and 15/33 will be roughly equal in expected time, in which case I'll run 33 again because we already have plenty of data for 32LP at such sizes. I want to try a 34LP project soon, even if inefficient, to learn how many relations are needed. My candidates are 13*2^901-1 (SNFS-272ish, ECM complete) and a future GNFS-185 (13*2^962-1). I would use 15f or 15f/16f combo for either one. |
C179 result from CADO:
[code]R0: -64196393134265280636665032921587310 R1: 864105056918342173001809 A0: -7651121059977140085488192200302080085131736 A1: 5281321730265663984694305917289217360 A2: 71950993821041134671572550935 A3: -4729878062803921224335 A4: -12447411213144 A5: 79920 skew 56893438.02, size 2.042e-17, alpha -7.737, combined = 1.102e-13 rroots = 5[/code] I searched adrange 0 to 50k with nq = 15625 and P = 6000000. root-opt-effort was set to 15. This took about a day on 12ish cores (started with 20, but quite a few timed out and lost their connection). |
@VBCurtis
Finally 1.1! Do you want me to try spinning this one? Just kidding. Both of us know I'll try it anyways. Promise not to post polys weaker than 1.093 though (or else I suspect you won't test-sieve any of my polys, maybe ever). I have another batch running at home, I'll post my findings tonight, if any. Big achievement though, congrats! And thanks for the parameters too. |
C179 poly
[code]
Y0: -128435074647151944150487333609702608 Y1: 864105056918342173001809 c0: 14994618210495194060954855040317274862427993120 c1: 205701103821565623222236066493197554124 c2: 723931248159636502201683311497 c3: -3033027231684673104719 c4: -11112704913372 c5: 19980 skew: 327371731.78 # size 2.063e-17, alpha -9.169, combined = 1.120e-13 rroots = 3 [/code] |
C179 poly
Scratch that.
[code] Y0: -128523838470381470691554942404362152 Y1: 864105056918342173001809 c0: -46146830350059314755544033804148394855803840 c1: 20285880472748172696283127848757659996 c2: 738472982218472967927155990017 c3: 3641422426024419959089 c4: -21374774171772 c5: 19980 skew: 177156362.19 # size 2.270e-17, alpha -8.728, combined = 1.169e-13 rroots = 5 [/code] |
Holy [censored]!!! Nice finds, sir.
Guess I'll be testing all polys over 1.10. :max: Edit: Note alpha of -9 on a deg 5! Yeesh. |
C179 polys
[code]
# norm 2.717218e-017 alpha -8.681513 e 1.159e-013 rroots 5 skew: 177684315.44 c0: -364713085239704240891899631418383842502924100 c1: 16669338354962387856999134439962588497 c2: 710393258628363180522922244998 c3: 3856152591996592566937 c4: -21624216579672 c5: 19980 Y0: -128525996072444296295411896254292241 Y1: 864105056918342173001809 [/code][code] # norm 2.716634e-017 alpha -8.679707 e 1.139e-013 rroots 5 skew: 44294410.78 c0: -22774584776094832738952309668281239582856870 c1: 4174142994254797991374742622791104203 c2: 710614920467958011950617801613 c3: 15417979811758321865668 c4: -345956831938752 c5: 1278720 Y0: -32131494877967720113846037668655689 Y1: 864105056918342173001809 [/code] |
C179 record poly
Oops! Holy CADO!
(A slight improvement through msieve is still expected). [code] Y0: -32098150312453048536394337846959694 Y1: 864105056918342173001809 c0: -18421093653658835977915014560828934689651145 c1: 2648730673817449474836171573646638914 c2: 70431024955044761815604225549 c3: -9470398565278778793886 c4: -49618523345376 c5: 639360 skew: 41683064.78648 # lognorm 56.37, E 48.14, alpha -8.23 (proj -2.56), 5 real roots # MurphyE = 1.22631565e-13 [/code] |
[QUOTE=VBCurtis;483558]Guess I'll be testing all polys over 1.10. :max:
[/QUOTE] It seems that you'll be test-sieving all polys over 1.20 actually. Your old friend: [code] # norm 2.847327e-017 alpha -8.142920 e 1.214e-013 rroots 5 skew: 83221700.70 c0: -64221387391441259518774375338311569213532390 c1: 5500239844271331698055497329253143793 c2: 45341721035809978266184142204 c3: -4819603110998663494223 c4: -11705168998344 c5: 79920 Y0: -64194788091093941922057342462436743 Y1: 864105056918342173001809 [/code]and his buddies: [code] # norm 2.882570e-017 alpha -8.186802 e 1.215e-013 rroots 5 skew: 41075182.89 c0: 341655141638362198846387868147831267983440 c1: 2437585437799953430269662301355715882 c2: 104212282863164358553342078811 c3: -9222036815104969933342 c4: -53469423790176 c5: 639360 Y0: -32099191222909767997477699729100993 Y1: 864105056918342173001809 [/code][code] # norm 2.931139e-017 alpha -8.229563 e 1.226e-013 rroots 5 skew: 41563365.23 c0: -16044704580477138445599297535942212590885385 c1: 2750470388719532843656946041775560706 c2: 45229820104467967745668545869 c3: -9639930816688786255774 c4: -46808305975776 c5: 639360 Y0: -32097390701892453215503632800718446 Y1: 864105056918342173001809 [/code] |
| All times are UTC. The time now is 23:11. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.