[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;442019]No worries about C202_123_83. I only think for the future we need to be more careful on choosing the polynomial and in case of doubt just report here for support.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. I'm reexamining all my polys for potential problems. Again sorry for making this one harder than necessary.

Does anyone have C202_123_83 reserved? If not I'll post a reservation in the other thread.

[QUOTE=swellman;442081]Agreed. I'm reexamining all my polys for potential problems. Again sorry for making this one harder than necessary.

Does anyone have C202_123_83 reserved? If not I'll post a reservation in the other thread.[/QUOTE]

No, it's available.

Please queue c162 from 933436:i12559 to the 14e.

[CODE]n: 795920047042543914656829537845200481309506505038518446055002165764050840398353508711177983426317295957924694485101194353630753839543880577771191450837035436488119
skew: 4276628.15
c0: -184620391078996498929537142306323507456
c1: 201753604300871811202196057593092
c2: 68344967267066717900756454
c3: -61879483896866674303
c4: -5440572254350
c5: 389400
Y0: -18284989545726808492563649765475
Y1: 257676068359981751
rlim: 43600000
alim: 43600000
lpbr: 30
lpba: 30
mfbr: 60
mfba: 60
rlambda: 2.6
alambda: 2.6
[/CODE]

[QUOTE=unconnected;442576]Please queue c162 from 933436:i12559 to the 14e.[/QUOTE]

I hope this was queued as GNFS (with the appropriate lss: value) even though it shows SNFS in the Queued queue.

[QUOTE=RichD;442664]I hope this was queued as GNFS (with the appropriate lss: value) even though it shows SNFS in the Queued queue.[/QUOTE]

As it happens it was queued with "lss: 0" which I assume is what you consider appropriate for a GNFS job. However, it's worth asking: Dmitry, did you do any test sieving, and if so, which side was better for special-Q, algebraic or rational?

The following xyyx numbers have come out of yoyo after surviving t55. All are ready for sieving on the rational side. Polys attached.

C241_121_116
C224_122_99
C238_124_89
C231_124_91
C231_127_88
C243_130_83

All are of SNFS difficulty 245-250, all 31-bit jobs. I had figured them for the 14e queue, but subsequent review and retest sieving indicates all are likely better suited for 15e. The yields for all on 14e are <1.0 rel/Q.

Or perhaps run them on 14e as 32-bit jobs? Is that a practical approach?

I have used Yafu, snfspoly and hand calculations, as well as extensive test sieving, to determine and check these polynomials. My eye however is not what it should be, so I may have missed something obvious to others. A couple of these are quintics - I could not find sextics that were even close in performance. Some ugly number here...

C247_125_102 is finishing up ECM (t55). It's a borderline 14e/15e.

[code]
n: 1627563757155629890159556253861348470217382344829613295369475546727473839944027399400127177035550633727689091864096074845838696377726911641428847572327402308319640834340045892720262974991617331415048016481772354447711452052911372393187366678275891
# 125^102+102^125, difficulty: 253.08, anorm: 2.02e+037, rnorm: 1.03e+048
# scaled difficulty: 254.87, suggest sieving rational side
# size = 1.288e-012, alpha = 0.000, combined = 1.431e-013, rroots = 0
type: snfs
size: 253
skew: 2.1616
c6: 1
c0: 102
Y1: -444089209850062616169452667236328125
Y0: 1515666343897921428876285489468986728906752
rlim: 134000000
alim: 134000000
lpbr: 31
lpba: 31
mfbr: 62
mfba: 62
rlambda: 2.7
alambda: 2.7
[/code]

A few more xyyx candidates for 14e. All polys seem to be well behaved with good yields and speeds. Just trying to feed the grid.


C237_137_56
C223_136_94<---note: sieve on algebraic side
C215_145_46
C200_133_65
C225_149_42

[code]
n: 301530556103252307549614934352787129673307391525971573447788714811273953985050554591734299589215581839191953873402267521635684573596541606002446769110510741083807768545242193262421389476157592585234133897108148306968364124992071965854709
# 137^56+56^137, difficulty: 241.85, anorm: 2.05e+039, rnorm: 3.60e+045
# scaled difficulty: 242.89, suggest sieving rational side
# size = 3.610e-012, alpha = 0.000, combined = 3.131e-013, rroots = 0
type: snfs
size: 241
skew: 5.0417
c6: 8
c0: 131383
Y1: -17001416405572203977
Y0: 8077828444807867164699107212814983364608
rlim: 134000000
alim: 134000000
lpbr: 31
lpba: 31
mfbr: 62
mfba: 62
rlambda: 2.7
alambda: 2.7
[/code]



[code]
n: 2068830899233676639832944145184044096406079304740801578064368787748498015453308467846362952511935162493189776145615257899194954627592946043595716284191190071102845329474924142950370461324865070269569959983838094963790710453
# 136^94+94^136, difficulty: 233.21, anorm: 3.20e+039, rnorm: 2.16e+044
# scaled difficulty: 233.21, suggest sieving [b]algebraic side[/b]
# size = 3.568e-012, alpha = 0.000, combined = 3.156e-013, rroots = 0
type: snfs
size: 233
skew: 1.7683
c6: 289
c0: 8836
Y1: -816399326915508196549328896
Y0: 287243845682065590744605010781602099023
rlim: 134000000
alim: 134000000
lpbr: 31
lpba: 31
mfbr: 62
mfba: 62
rlambda: 2.7
alambda: 2.7
[/code]



[code]
n: 51949343999547029756605822451072445891110340436902689811366273044057181368925214803545903350770095659006340394776664770153687900310484588785235765324787959911626682865460988140280865748112875067853437525789192143321
# 145^46+46^145, difficulty: 241.10, anorm: 2.41e+031, rnorm: 1.01e+054
# scaled difficulty: 244.87, suggest sieving rational side
# siever: 15
# size = 1.340e-016, alpha = 0.000, combined = 2.701e-013, rroots = 1
type: snfs
size: 241
skew: 2.7057
c5: 1
c0: 145
Y1: -28334269484119140625
Y0: 1659499472763109991171612967522797815962278035456
rlim: 134000000
alim: 134000000
lpbr: 31
lpba: 31
mfbr: 62
mfba: 62
rlambda: 2.7
alambda: 2.7
[/code]



[code]
n: 16190624160770231344504638076751280115254579497112564467354115051064153323320679250984983788780710168215437670922803142677428132081145225034520910004801225030029387271115467852109666745938754164282477
# 133^65+65^133, difficulty: 241.12, anorm: 1.86e+038, rnorm: -1.63e+046
# scaled difficulty: 242.44, suggest sieving rational side
# size = 4.670e-012, alpha = 0.000, combined = 3.700e-013, rroots = 0
type: snfs
size: 241
skew: 4.5303
c6: 1
c0: 8645
Y1: -7657620615851533663648054599761962890625
Y0: 230339304218442143770717
rlim: 134000000
alim: 134000000
lpbr: 31
lpba: 31
mfbr: 62
mfba: 62
rlambda: 2.7
alambda: 2.7
[/code]


[code]
n: 494010416212077574709558855717260257206587195081557420949812280973173126838197926652978645930663153358304237301128340103796339827891828996719733731202039750818482307360094629229204682111872891488673312662903112184977745500623
# 149^42+42^149, difficulty: 243.49, anorm: 1.30e+037, rnorm: 2.79e+046
# scaled difficulty: 245.04, suggest sieving rational side
# size = 5.586e-012, alpha = 0.000, combined = 4.167e-013, rroots = 0
type: snfs
size: 243
skew: 1.8644
c6: 1
c0: 42
Y1: -1630436461403549
Y0: 38126967124946768663101433365298971410432
rlim: 134000000
alim: 134000000
lpbr: 31
lpba: 31
mfbr: 62
mfba: 62
rlambda: 2.7
alambda: 2.7
[/code]

Four more xyyx candidates coming out of ECM (t55) by yoyo. All are best sieved on the rational side. The first two listed are borderline 14e/15e, the second pair are almost certainly 15e.

Two candidates for 14e/15e:
C249_125_106
C232_126_107

[code]
n: 145247875740210673019288827484052167445541695112293076354508907247441745759830025787482331899733867730252938472150443604614873800491298115409820267765132011008833636711063976881821981762526824218698282550846522841064441839805438072935467676117011139
# 125^106+106^125, difficulty: 256.39, anorm: 8.24e+037, rnorm: 1.63e+048
# scaled difficulty: 258.11, suggest sieving rational side
# size = 1.073e-012, alpha = 0.000, combined = 1.251e-013, rroots = 0
type: snfs
size: 256
skew: 1.0877
c6: 32
c0: 53
Y1: -11102230246251565404236316680908203125
Y0: 1699781800272807707897986281826313047113728
rlim: 134000000
alim: 134000000
lpbr: 31
lpba: 31
mfbr: 62
mfba: 62
rlambda: 2.7
alambda: 2.7
[/code]


[code]
n: 2887884444212159417484451416563223463940590134126168004586647514085637539224478341689850930050221157525576138337988534178438744496207163444059886895143961485721141270709867989065788570209629350576520930852028248609276141003325224407
# 126^107+107^126, difficulty: 256.85, anorm: 6.73e+037, rnorm: 3.58e+048
# scaled difficulty: 258.64, suggest sieving rational side
# size = 9.897e-013, alpha = 0.000, combined = 1.169e-013, rroots = 0
type: snfs
size: 256
skew: 2.239
c6: 1
c0: 126
Y1: 4140562374860211619063098135818149338786107
Y0: -64072225938746379480587511979135205376
rlim: 134000000
alim: 134000000
lpbr: 31
lpba: 31
mfbr: 62
mfba: 62
rlambda: 2.7
alambda: 2.7
[/code]



Two candidates for 15e:
C239_127_92
C237_127_93


[code]n: 44676261813276484410444766899960546478725170694498232168116132583277535544785923213465014071893339904788969639117075069394491590283776838312926293593932871997206006331751725866039542440260093259266956284427026551575288356564909254346636893
# 127^92+92^127, difficulty: 251.36, anorm: 2.44e+039, rnorm: 1.13e+047
# scaled difficulty: 252.64, suggest sieving rational side
# size = 5.926e-013, alpha = 0.000, combined = 8.474e-014, rroots = 0
type: snfs
size: 251
skew: 2.3658
c6: 92
c0: 16129
Y1: -36062498658084837781704007862143
Y0: 173597862829772829348420127559890912673792
rlim: 134000000
alim: 134000000
lpbr: 31
lpba: 31
mfbr: 62
mfba: 62
rlambda: 2.7
alambda: 2.7
[/code]


[code]
n: 288451229378380119245544897527252606344273691547704127599866473543417731508845800333629102892257698550879031154128093670778198504298435658862276631813318543332430030824128042042437317264798370108191094687001449675543365388458282655490687
# 127^93+93^127, difficulty: 251.97, anorm: 2.76e+040, rnorm: 9.47e+046
# scaled difficulty: 253.05, suggest sieving rational side
# size = 3.566e-013, alpha = 0.000, combined = 5.905e-014, rroots = 0
type: snfs
size: 251
skew: 5.2945
c6: 93
c0: 2048383
Y1: -36062498658084837781704007862143
Y0: 217842152506210285848936722357074971618093
rlim: 134000000
alim: 134000000
lpbr: 31
lpba: 31
mfbr: 62
mfba: 62
rlambda: 2.7
alambda: 2.7
[/code]

70841^53-1
 

[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;441163]What's up with 70841^53-1 (15e)?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=RichD;441263]The poly file contains lss: 0.
Does that mean the GNFS side for this SNFS poly?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=jyb;441266]It means that it should sieve special-q on the algebraic side, rather than the rational side. It's most common to use the algebraic side for GNFS, and somewhat more common to use the rational side for SNFS, but that doesn't mean one has to use the rational side for SNFS.

I.e. there's nothing inherently wrong with having "lss: 0" in the poly file for an SNFS job. In fact, there are some SNFS jobs in the 14e queue right now with lss: 0, per the recommendation of the person who submitted them.[/QUOTE]

I downloaded the poly file and ran both sides. The algebraic side did sieve better but no more than 10%.

It seems the best way to handle this number is to sieve about half on each side at the lower special-q values. I didn't have any problems with sieving on my Linux box.

I wonder if we should keep what we have and start a new run (at least some trial WUs) on the rational side. If nothing else, just to get this cleared off the queue.

The problem with that one was that jobs were mysteriously crashing on some Linux boxes; I couldn't replicate, but it was annoying the grid-master and so I paused the job. I'm almost tempted to finish it on my personal hardware, but it'd be a couple of months and I have a constant flood of aliquot-sequence numbers rolling by.