Current status

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by frmky

The factorization of 7,271- is complete. The sieving for this one went faster than we expected, and therefore it was very oversieved. I initially filtered only the relations I had here in California to see the size of the matrix created. Here's that filtering log:



Greg

Nice result......

I am about half way through the LA for 2,1101+, half-way through the
sieving for 2,1104+ and will then do 2,1538M. Sam Wagstaff does not show
anyone doing 2,799+. Is anyone doing it or may I reserve it?

[bsquared]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

Nice result......

I am about half way through the LA for 2,1101+, half-way through the
sieving for 2,1104+ and will then do 2,1538M. Sam Wagstaff does not show
anyone doing 2,799+. Is anyone doing it or may I reserve it?

I'm doing it. Sieving is 95% done. Sorry, I never reserved it with Sam Wagstaff.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by bsquared

I'm doing it. Sieving is 95% done. Sorry, I never reserved it with Sam Wagstaff.

Thanks for the info.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by bsquared

I'm doing it. Sieving is 95% done. Sorry, I never reserved it with Sam Wagstaff.

I like your Avatar....

The student, of course, is 100% correct. The question did not
say "compute the value of x". The teacher needs to be more careful......

[bsquared]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

I like your Avatar....

Thanks! I ran across that and several others like it in a mass e-mail awhile back (attached).

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

I like your Avatar....

The student, of course, is 100% correct. The question did not
say "compute the value of x". The teacher needs to be more careful......

Agreed. Nonetheless, something tells me that the teacher did not award any creativity points to the student in this case...

- ben.

[bsquared]

More that didn't fit in previous post...

[bsquared]

I'd like to reserve 2,1598L for SNFS. SNFS seems to be the way to go, especially since I now have experience with SNFS on this size number (namely, 2,799+), while I have none with GNFS on a C171.

I'm still playing around with parameterization, using this poly

 
n: 344682277495113483576737243789457319844973285487058684789549245491555989770819433641425904625087602042261741581803359854653090524174719942048090727106451863564668263059909
skew: 1 
c6: 2
c3: -2 
c0: 1 
Y1: -1 
Y0: 10889035741470030830827987437816582766592

- ben.

p.s. I've sent email to Sam Wagstaff about both this and 2,799+.
p.p.s Is this the best place to post such a reservation, or should I start a new thread?

[frmky]

Originally Posted by bsquared

I'd like to reserve 2,1598L for SNFS.

Numbers like this always frustrate me. I keep thinking there surely must be a way to use an algebraic factor like, for this one,

65536x^736+65536x^713 + 32768x^690 - 16384x^644 - 16384x^621 - 8192x^598 + 4096x^552 + 4096x^529 + 2048x^506 - 1024x^460 - 1024x^437 - 512x^414 + 256x^368 - 128x^322 - 128x^299 - 64x^276 + 32x^230 + 32x^207 + 16x^184 - 8x^138 - 8x^115 - 4x^92 + 2x^46 + 2x^23 + 1

Degree 32 (or 16) polys are useless, though.

Originally Posted by bsquared

p.p.s Is this the best place to post such a reservation, or should I start a new thread?

They don't need to be reserved here at all, just with Sam.

Greg

[bsquared]

Originally Posted by frmky

Numbers like this always frustrate me. I keep thinking there surely must be a way to use an algebraic factor...

Greg

Yeah, I know how you feel. I had pari print out the first 90 some splittings, and stared at that same one for a while.

something like
for(n=2,99,print(n,",",1598\n,",",factor(2^(1598%n)*x^n+1)))

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by bdodson

The NFSNET resources are mostly Richard's and Greg's; the two 10,257's (minus and plus) at difficulty 257.

<snip>

Did you do ECM pre-testing on 10,257-? While the C241 had 3 factors,
and would have required NFS to finish in any case, should the smaller
factor (a p54) be considered an ECM miss?

[frmky]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

Did you do ECM pre-testing on 10,257-? While the C241 had 3 factors,
and would have required NFS to finish in any case, should the smaller
factor (a p54) be considered an ECM miss?

Probaby so. From Bruce,

I have the
pre-test recorded as 7*t50 (which refers to the effort, not the limits;
almost all of the curves were either B1=110M (p55-optimal) or
B1=260M (p60-optimal)). That's supposed to be somewhere in
the range between t55 and 2*t55; which means that the chances
of finding a known p55 are between 63.2% and 86.4%, midrange
might be 1-exp(-1.5) = 77.68%, so I spent an effort sufficient
to find 3 of 4 known p55's, leaving 1 of 4 to be found by sieving.
There've certainly been lots of p54-p56's found; and among recent
sieving candidates I found a p53 (on-schedule) and a p57 (early).

Greg