mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Prime Search Projects > Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2007-11-09, 15:57   #23
masser
 
masser's Avatar
 
Jul 2003
wear a mask

2×829 Posts
Default 200<=n<400 candidates

The candidates with n between 200 and 400 have only been ECM'd up to 35 digits. It might make sense to do more ECM before factoring them... just a warning.
masser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-11-10, 18:10   #24
michaf
 
michaf's Avatar
 
Jan 2005

479 Posts
Default

hmm... this one bothers me...
after four times the same return value (65280) with ggnfs

I haven't tried msieve yet, no idea if (and how) you can put the poly values in there yet. I will read into that first :)

In the meantime, does anyone know what is the problem here? :

Quote:
-> Found 12492 relation-sets versus minFF=159533.
-> More sieving needed.
-> Q0=625001, QSTEP=75000.
-> makeJobFile(): q0=625000, q1=700000.
-> makeJobFile(): Adjusted to q0=625001, q1=700000.
-> Lattice sieving q-values from q=625001 to 700000.
=> "../ggnfs/ggnfs/src/gnfs-lasieve4I12e.exe" -k -o spairs.out -v -n0 -a 24032_5_181p1.job
-> Return value 65280. Updating job file and terminating...
=>"c:/mingw/msys/1.0/bin/cat.exe" spairs.out >> spairs.add
-> makeJobFile(): q0=625000, q1=700000.
-> makeJobFile(): Adjusted to q0=625001, q1=700000.
Terminating...
michaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-11-10, 20:43   #25
smh
 
smh's Avatar
 
"Sander"
Oct 2002
52.345322,5.52471

100101001012 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by michaf View Post
hmm... this one bothers me...
after four times the same return value (65280) with ggnfs

I haven't tried msieve yet, no idea if (and how) you can put the poly values in there yet. I will read into that first :)

In the meantime, does anyone know what is the problem here? :
Don't know what's wrong here but i've seen this before. Just increase the special-q a couple of thousand and continue sieving.
smh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-11-11, 03:44   #26
frmky
 
frmky's Avatar
 
Jul 2003
So Cal

2·34·13 Posts
Default

If you compiled your binaries from source, try removing -fomit-frame-pointer from CFLAGS in src/Makefile and recompiling. I'm not sure of the error number, but I was getting occasional crashes in the lattice sieve until I removed that compiler option.

Greg
frmky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-11-11, 22:19   #27
konrad127123
 
konrad127123's Avatar
 
Jun 2005

2116 Posts
Default

53546*5^200-1: I had a load of errors again, so I tried commenting out the code where it detected the error, and ended up with a valid partial factorisation!:
[11/11 09:39:34] From dependence 24, sqrt obtained:
[11/11 09:39:34] r1=9371472846912361231466755306955909048138768280468851408539860585052203785
619765448104405489006204468163 (c103)
[11/11 09:39:34] r2=355565855561475148370692149966677312439523 (pp42)

Based on the time this took, at this level I should ecm part, but not all of the way up to 40 digits.

Reserving: 325846*5^201-1
konrad127123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-11-12, 00:21   #28
mdettweiler
A Sunny Moo
 
mdettweiler's Avatar
 
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)

3·2,083 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by konrad127123 View Post
53546*5^200-1: I had a load of errors again, so I tried commenting out the code where it detected the error, and ended up with a valid partial factorisation!:
[11/11 09:39:34] From dependence 24, sqrt obtained:
[11/11 09:39:34] r1=9371472846912361231466755306955909048138768280468851408
539860585052203785619765448104405489006204468163 (c103)
[11/11 09:39:34] r2=355565855561475148370692149966677312439523 (pp42)

Based on the time this took, at this level I should ecm part, but not all of the way up to 40 digits.

Reserving: 325846*5^201-1
I think for the purposes of this project, all we need is one factor, so the one factor you got (I'm assuming the pp42 listed there actually is a factor, and not something else) would be enough to whack this candidate out of the sieve file, I would think.
mdettweiler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-01, 21:17   #29
masser
 
masser's Avatar
 
Jul 2003
wear a mask

2·829 Posts
Default

Any word on this final reservation with n < 200?

Code:
24032*5^181+1 reserved      (michaf)
masser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-02, 08:24   #30
michaf
 
michaf's Avatar
 
Jan 2005

479 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by masser View Post
Any word on this final reservation with n < 200?

Code:
24032*5^181+1 reserved      (michaf)
My apologies,

I've tried to get it fed to ggnfs withg snfs, but didn't succeed in the end. It just refused to get sieving. (iirc, something about a very bad poly)

If someone else is able to do it the right way, go ahead :)
michaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-02, 13:27   #31
konrad127123
 
konrad127123's Avatar
 
Jun 2005

3·11 Posts
Default

I didn't manage to get 325846*5^201-1 to work, so I'm unreserving it.
konrad127123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-03, 01:10   #32
fivemack
(loop (#_fork))
 
fivemack's Avatar
 
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England

72×131 Posts
Default

This is interesting; you've found a new bug in the Franke siever, thanks! My original thought was that 24032*5^181+1 was behaving oddly when sieved with a quintic since 24032 is divisible by 32, and you might want to write it as 3755*(2*5^36)^5+1, but that doesn't seem to work either.

I'm trying jasonp's new implementation of line sieving on 24032*5^181+1, which is running slowly (~10 relations per second when I'd expect ~100 from the lattice sievers, but that's not accounting for the batch-factorisation step which probably adds another factor two to the yield) but does at least seem to be finding relations. If that works reasonably I'll try the same approach on 325846*5^201-1
fivemack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-02-03, 10:52   #33
michaf
 
michaf's Avatar
 
Jan 2005

479 Posts
Default

ah, that good (or bad, depending on the way you see things)
It never even occurred to me that it might NOT be me...

Do I need to report it anywhere, or will you take the upon you, to avoid future misses?

Quote:
Originally Posted by fivemack View Post
This is interesting; you've found a new bug in the Franke siever, thanks! My original thought was that 24032*5^181+1 was behaving oddly when sieved with a quintic since 24032 is divisible by 32, and you might want to write it as 3755*(2*5^36)^5+1, but that doesn't seem to work either.

I'm trying jasonp's new implementation of line sieving on 24032*5^181+1, which is running slowly (~10 relations per second when I'd expect ~100 from the lattice sievers, but that's not accounting for the batch-factorisation step which probably adds another factor two to the yield) but does at least seem to be finding relations. If that works reasonably I'll try the same approach on 325846*5^201-1
michaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
SNFS targets which need more ECM XYYXF XYYXF Project 57 2017-07-04 19:15
SNFS(27x) How much ECM before switching to NFS? YuL Factoring 24 2015-06-08 01:26
SNFS polynomials for k*b^n+-1 mdettweiler Factoring 15 2010-01-14 21:13
SNFS Sample(10^4+1) nuggetprime Factoring 1 2007-06-11 16:31
Completed my first SNFS job schickel Factoring 0 2007-05-27 05:42

All times are UTC. The time now is 09:45.


Sat Jul 17 09:45:36 UTC 2021 up 50 days, 7:32, 1 user, load averages: 1.12, 1.26, 1.34

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.