Best msieve poly scores - Page 9

fivemack · 2018-01-31, 12:10

C202 cofactor from 139!+1 : 3.405e-15 (best-sieving polynomial, currently sieving on 176 threads); 3.665e-15 best-scoring polynomial

Max0526 · 2018-02-01, 02:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by VBCurtis

I look forward to trying a CADO search on deg 6; we simply need a worthy candidate! Wombatman, did your C207 ever get queued on Greg's 16e?

Yes, it did. They chose 207_5 to do the job: https://pastebin.com/RFkgXQj7

Max0526 · 2018-02-01, 02:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by VBCurtis

As far as I know, all CADO scores in the table are those computed using the regular Murphy E-score, not the one the current CADO tools report. I think Max has been aiming msieve at CADO polys to read E-scores, but perhaps he has a more elegant way.

Click on http://myfactors.mooo.com/, scroll down to "Optimal Skew", input your c0-c6, Y0, Y1, and click "Submit". It finds an optimal skew with a proper msieve score. Very rarely it doesn't work, then I manually find an optimal skew using msieve. In any case, all my scores in the table are proper msieve scores.
Kudos to Jonathan Crombie for all the tools and links on his page!

VBCurtis · 2018-02-01, 03:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Max0526

Click on http://myfactors.mooo.com/, scroll down to "Optimal Skew", input your c0-c6, Y0, Y1, and click "Submit". It finds an optimal skew with a proper msieve score. Very rarely it doesn't work, then I manually find an optimal skew using msieve. In any case, all my scores in the table are proper msieve scores.
Kudos to Jonathan Crombie for all the tools and links on his page!

Thanks, Max! I used this to find scores for the polys I posted in the 3408 Aliquot thread.

Max0526 · 2018-02-25, 01:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Max0526

cofactor of 5,485+
http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpos...&postcount=689
http://pastebin.com/MvCekKbG
selected by CADO-NFS

Code:

Msieve v. 1.53 (SVN 993M)
factoring 159606844777486996622001493248676781253657446160340103919763525855973407957438040283455724644299994710800278969793293354792687084555688685456352819684945756597119754044342907824786336052619581 (192 digits)
R0: -11223325240205109992788983735570908718
R1: 7795093661095776174539
A0: 4798173127422106445769476004221526210702741745
A1: -179763441456522808486319960507175658459
A2: -7935748430535924107883194070573
A3: 12215109140753003345515
A4: 190922679292724
A5: 896280
skew 123369921.06, size 9.514e-19, alpha -7.132, combined = 1.698e-14 rroots = 3

I knew it's possible!
I just created a better poly feeding a modified old one into msieve. No CADO involved (yet).
Record table watch out!

Code:

R0: -11223325529762009907067434824924456973
R1: 38975468305478880872695
A0: -1514518367714714955720866301348016276662780800
A1: -35349781178566549344622401776101719896
A2: -327028817667762419885961731106
A3: -757170459840246098161
A4: 24456393229724
A5: 4481400
skew 68370333.02, size 9.721e-019, alpha -7.308, combined = 1.746e-014 rroots = 1

Max0526 · 2018-02-25, 02:02

And again!

Code:

R0: -11223325453421617597428671394955959763
R1: 77950936610957761745390
A0: 27783598260081130372479440973889026902354850
A1: -9159631336468269776696062433039816503
A2: -165289140409452177595558890642
A3: -393636358509257942673
A4: 136688982351448
A5: 17925600
skew 26156805.15, size 1.002e-018, alpha -6.775, combined = 1.788e-014 rroots = 3

Max0526 · 2018-02-25, 18:33

CADO me this!

Code:

n: 159606844777486996622001493248676781253657446160340103919763525855973407957438040283455724644299994710800278969793293354792687084555688685456352819684945756597119754044342907824786336052619581
Y0: -11223325920226202386889181099280996753
Y1: 77950936610957761745390
c0: -149080459310384195326342629598930509868009608
c1: -7224483001227665734696886927799553030
c2: -167302114110648019506246979335
c3: 2760523726076373743055
c4: -400043007596552
c5: 17925600
skew: 34185893.46989
# lognorm 58.65, E 51.17, alpha -7.48 (proj -2.05), 1 real root
# MurphyE = 1.82458604e-14

VBCurtis · 2018-02-25, 20:42

I don't understand why you're trying to improve polys for numbers which have already been factored. A better poly is usually available from more effort; I don't see how your efforts are different from someone else spending another GPU-month to try to set a record.

We're not trying to set records for their own sake. We're trying to have a public record of scores folks actually achieve when doing factorizations, so others that come later have an idea of what to aim for (and thus how much more time they may wish to spend on poly select). Setting artificial records doesn't advance that reference data; it distorts things a bit, actually.

Max0526 · 2018-03-03, 01:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by lorgix

547^97-1 (c151)

Code:

# norm 2.250160e-014 alpha -7.442564 e 6.423e-012 rroots 5
skew: 1576336.35
c0: -224892123760860127599655348688526705
c1: 2656807800756173903312494013874
c2: 1193061104863474198592747
c3: -2462504880291162356
c4: -482629274860
c5: 358800
Y0: -78619529763842715013646237482
Y1: 321544603785103

# norm 2.235836e-014 alpha -7.394872 e 6.391e-012 rroots 5
skew: 1513923.95
c0: 125503290026964733079026712104739775
c1: 2332576585400481642173343711810
c2: 1923497881118766401251019
c3: -2223929271425703796
c4: -668530730860
c5: 358800
Y0: -78619529797162453036273750754
Y1: 321544603785103

The number is not factored yet. After scaling c5 down eight times and five core-minutes of root-opt in msieve:

Code:

R0: -157239059595365745954999879919
R1: 321544603785103
A0: 486932251726910818132684202688035400
A1: 4652665514158209904420697602158
A2: 1934285647017056314868987
A3: -1109795902278261578
A4: -167858579965
A5: 44850
skew 3029340.41, size 1.848e-014, alpha -7.394, combined = 6.459e-012 rroots = 5
elapsed time 00:04:44

Also, c5 mod 12 = 6 <> 0 (not a standard msieve or CADO step).

Max0526 · 2018-03-03, 03:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Max0526

cofactor of 10^229-11
http://stdkmd.com/nrr/c.cgi?q=99989_229

Code:

# Murphy_E = 3.33376892e-12, selected by Maksym Voznyy
# selected by CADO-NFS
n: 11237973604853438894633230488398553263998036286864563315277678698673759755714368015717953146979831393813369932269488734266335042833352264474821788514826657
Y0: -827984481989963014079656665250
Y1: 1430450098606045720351
c0: -1079578937546544703808617475530986258279
c1: 263773488565783315163069479644596
c2: 67253621739298122558766443
c3: -10739198374180798436
c4: 571697273556
c5: 85680
skew: 8301138.10965
type: gnfs

The number is not factored yet. The poly obtained after scaling c5 down eight times and root-optimization for three core-minutes in msieve is below. Again, c5 mod 12 = 6 <> 0 (not a standard msieve or CADO step).

Code:

R0: -1657511329633346813684733152038
R1: 1430450098606045720351
A0: -4802039408097651388238897351956060903200
A1: 363143838337757514244125874622716
A2: 85485463968019172054699991
A3: -5861510753459501146
A4: 85184673489
A5: 10710
skew 16712221.32, size 6.142e-015, alpha -8.884, combined = 3.370e-012 rroots = 3
elapsed time 00:02:58

Max0526 · 2018-03-03, 04:04

http://stdkmd.com/nrr/c.cgi?q=14441_242

The number is not factored yet. The poly obtained after scaling c5 down by a factor of 16 and root-optimization for six core-minutes in msieve is below. This time c5 mod 12 = 3 <> 0 (not a standard msieve or CADO step). Now, that's one unexpected c5.

Code:

R0: -16029545199866811125755410123845
R1: 130100560777841050991
A0: 362743500961484483553989580112177784184
A1: 446608376922063208707148411882953
A2: -60909002100805305117632561
A3: -5049042770469723463
A4: 250043115732
A5: 7155
skew 15143006.84, size 1.850e-015, alpha -6.749, combined = 1.673e-012 rroots = 5
elapsed time 00:05:52

2018-03-03, 04:04	#99
Max0526 "Max" Jun 2016 Toronto 19×47 Posts	C160 http://stdkmd.com/nrr/c.cgi?q=14441_242 The number is not factored yet. The poly obtained after scaling c5 down by a factor of 16 and root-optimization for six core-minutes in msieve is below. This time c5 mod 12 = 3 <> 0 (not a standard msieve or CADO step). Now, that's one unexpected c5. Code: R0: -16029545199866811125755410123845 R1: 130100560777841050991 A0: 362743500961484483553989580112177784184 A1: 446608376922063208707148411882953 A2: -60909002100805305117632561 A3: -5049042770469723463 A4: 250043115732 A5: 7155 skew 15143006.84, size 1.850e-015, alpha -6.749, combined = 1.673e-012 rroots = 5 elapsed time 00:05:52

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
msieve parallel poly selection with MPI	drone84	Msieve	4	2017-06-28 09:18
msieve poly select: choosing Stage1norm	VBCurtis	Msieve	0	2016-04-11 21:33
Resume msieve poly search job?	Andi47	Msieve	1	2011-03-28 04:30
Msieve / lattice siever with degree 7/8 poly	Batalov	Msieve	54	2010-01-13 19:45
Different msieve 1.39 poly selection outputs...	Jeff Gilchrist	Msieve	5	2008-12-29 23:07

2018-01-31, 12:10	#89
fivemack (loop (#_fork)) Feb 2006 Cambridge, England 7²·131 Posts	C202 cofactor from 139!+1 : 3.405e-15 (best-sieving polynomial, currently sieving on 176 threads); 3.665e-15 best-scoring polynomial

2018-02-25, 20:42	#96
VBCurtis "Curtis" Feb 2005 Riverside, CA 4,861 Posts	I don't understand why you're trying to improve polys for numbers which have already been factored. A better poly is usually available from more effort; I don't see how your efforts are different from someone else spending another GPU-month to try to set a record. We're not trying to set records for their own sake. We're trying to have a public record of scores folks actually achieve when doing factorizations, so others that come later have an idea of what to aim for (and thus how much more time they may wish to spend on poly select). Setting artificial records doesn't advance that reference data; it distorts things a bit, actually.