Queued C226_141_59 on 15e and C213_142_112 and C157_11040_10066 on 14e

[QUOTE=swellman;468707]
Suggesting a sieving range of 20M-255M with a target # relations=520M.[/QUOTE]

Note that when comparing 15e to 14e, 15e will produce fewer duplicate relations, so a 15e job will need fewer raw relations than the same job run on 14e. I bet 460-470M rels is enough here, while 500-520M would be enough for nearly any 15/32 job we could run.

450M 15e rels is often as good as 475M 14e rels; that is, the duplication rate is often 2/3rds. I'd like some confirmation of this; perhaps we could report raw vs unique relations for some time on the big 14e and all 15e jobs?

[QUOTE=VBCurtis;468728]Note that when comparing 15e to 14e, 15e will produce fewer duplicate relations, so a 15e job will need fewer raw relations than the same job run on 14e. I bet 460-470M rels is enough here, while 500-520M would be enough for nearly any 15/32 job we could run.

450M 15e rels is often as good as 475M 14e rels; that is, the duplication rate is often 2/3rds. I'd like some confirmation of this; perhaps we could report raw vs unique relations for some time on the big 14e and all 15e jobs?[/QUOTE]

I bow to your experience on the dup rate - 460M+ for the upper end of Q range seems a good thing. No need for extra work! Didn't realize the effect was that big.

Also I will report raw/unique relations for all my jobs from here on out. (No more 15/31 left in my queue, and only seven 14/31 jobs in the pipe).

I used to report both raw and unique, then I started using remdups so now I must pay attention to how many rels I downloaded before remdups-ing the file. This discussion is a reminder to myself that duplication rates matter, and the 14e queue is in new territory for nearly everyone here so data is scarce.

567661^41-1

I'm factoring this number, too.
My ETA is 01.10.2017.

Shall I proceed or stop ?

PS: I overlooked that the number was queued on 27.09.2017 (?)

[QUOTE=Alfred;468868]567661^41-1

I'm factoring this number, too.
My ETA is 01.10.2017.

Shall I proceed or stop ?

PS: I overlooked that the number was queued on 27.09.2017 (?)[/QUOTE]

Go ahead and finish it up. You will complete it before any post-processor will get to it Report the factors in the reservation thread so the entry can be removed from the queue.

15e candidate
 

[b]queued[/b] C215_147_53 is ready for SNFS as a 15e/32 job. Poly follows.
[code]
n: 10076208994859598682531631559632476483149792580846464207011654996964452486511085469244349665103204144457374964397184525525959111926947665668462480126249582933781635804479872947702733600393007111639304416333391508707
# 147^53+53^147, difficulty: 253.47, anorm: 9.36e+039, rnorm: -9.87e+047
# scaled difficulty: 254.81, suggest sieving rational side
# size = 3.242e-013, alpha = 0.000, combined = 5.409e-014, rroots = 0
type: snfs
size: 253
skew: 1.2556
c6: 148877
c0: 583443
Y1: 1526288802270065127
Y0: -241335311011519234780052665404754645838881
rlim: 268000000
alim: 268000000
lpbr: 32
lpba: 32
mfbr: 64
mfba: 64
rlambda: 2.8
alambda: 2.8
[/code]


Test sieving on the -r side with Q in blocks of 5k
[code]
Q=20M rels=14562
Q=80M rels=10995
Q=150M rels=9660
Q=200M rels=9485
Q=250M rels=8655
[/code]
Suggesting a sieving range for Q of 20M-240M with a target # rels=470M.

C224_122_119 is ready for SNFS as a 14e/32 job. Poly follows, sieve on the rational side.

[code]
n: 13307877300925386685345938840329367328291391900290267316907953921852040681608789787186937952056280570334468243036501611555199039785149719157777200413911511801319547784384281194429131286718282393950678213312628628743260334049
type: snfs
size: 254
skew: 10.954
c6: 1
c0: 1727642
Y1: 324294234694341316421188266002423799213601
Y0: -533576401152564663352396469720606521163776
rlim: 268000000
alim: 268000000
lpbr: 32
lpba: 32
mfbr: 64
mfba: 64
rlambda: 2.8
alambda: 2.8
[/code]


Test sieving on the -r side with Q in blocks of 10K
[code]
Q=20M rels=16088
Q=80M rels=12470
Q=150M rels=11521
Q=250M rels=9877
Q=350M rels=8915
Q=450M rels=7653
[/code]
Suggesting a sieving range for Q of 20M-490M with a target # rels=480M

Two for 14e
 

C227_135_76 is ready for SNFS as a 14e/32 job.
[code]
n: 71214437902112375896060657437728460097095202290204741636386555474729246128282657237134079404186626444618087412420357520216260587061572146926249192161085361782512091881680170848064795781912935659844494761770661911855612843638311
# 135^76+76^135, difficulty: 253.91, anorm: 2.32e+031, rnorm: 3.71e+056
# scaled difficulty: 258.11, suggest sieving rational side
# size = 2.283e-017, alpha = 0.000, combined = 8.004e-014, rroots = 1
type: snfs
size: 253
skew: 2.6673
c5: 1
c0: 135
Y1: -90158468827845266682220458984375
Y0: 605294867755151978358116750555481286863651157835776
rlim: 268000000
alim: 268000000
lpbr: 32
lpba: 32
mfbr: 64
mfba: 64
rlambda: 2.8
alambda: 2.8
[/code]


Test sieving on -r side with Q in blocks of 2K
[code]
Q=20M rels=2276
Q=80M rels=2531
Q=150M rels=2841
Q=250M rels=2978
Q=350M rels=2448
[/code]
Suggesting a sieving range for Q of 20M-380M with a target # rels=480M.

###############################

C227_140_61 is ready for SNFS as a 14e/32 job.
[code]
n: 10635572682307117167317953922926507675605717270731798946034434606605400168679923192857937714017057118456560683668735671068538016904190817593187769145392166670529533862425660587135557161772941230606817283786036463345241928211437
# 140^61+61^140, difficulty: 249.95, anorm: 2.37e+031, rnorm: 5.95e+055
# scaled difficulty: 254.01, suggest sieving rational side
# size = 3.290e-017, alpha = 1.145, combined = 1.057e-013, rroots = 1
type: snfs
size: 249
skew: 2.6867
c5: 1
c0: 140
Y1: -56693912375296000000000000
Y0: 97551820892064552722266841889541788960852432978481
rlim: 268000000
alim: 268000000
lpbr: 32
lpba: 32
mfbr: 64
mfba: 62
rlambda: 2.8
alambda: 2.8
[/code]

Test sieving on the -r side with Q in blocks of 2K
[code]
Q=20M rels=2756
Q=80M rels=2936
Q=150M rels=3213
Q=250M rels=3354
Q=350M rels=2836
[/code]
Suggesting a sieving range for Q of 20M-330M with target # rels=480M.

Sean-
Next time you test-sieve a candidate that stretches 14e (say, Q over 400M looks likely), try a test with rlim (assume sieving r side) of standard 268M, but alim (non-sieving side) of 400M or even 500M. This should improve yield a fair bit, while reducing the usual speed penalty from exceeding 268M factor-base bound.

This is likely to improve yield, but also result in a flatter sec/rel & yield curve at higher Q. sec/rel may get worse at lower Q, but hopefully the reduction in Q-range compensates. Worth a test-sieve, at least.

[QUOTE=VBCurtis;469061]Sean-
Next time you test-sieve a candidate that stretches 14e (say, Q over 400M looks likely), try a test with rlim (assume sieving r side) of standard 268M, but alim (non-sieving side) of 400M or even 500M. This should improve yield a fair bit, while reducing the usual speed penalty from exceeding 268M factor-base bound.

This is likely to improve yield, but also result in a flatter sec/rel & yield curve at higher Q. sec/rel may get worse at lower Q, but hopefully the reduction in Q-range compensates. Worth a test-sieve, at least.[/QUOTE]

Tip noted. Never tried it but will from now on. I do attempt 3 LPs, poly deg, etc on all such jobs but never a lopsided r/alim. Thank you.

ETA: I can go back and try this technique on my recently proposed 14/32 jobs.