![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Apr 2013
2 Posts |
![]()
In line sieve, we sieve for a particular small prime p for only once; and in lattice sieve, we sieve for that p for every special-q (p<q and number of special-q's may be very large). So, what is the gain in the latter one? Definitely, I am missing something. Can anyone please elaborate the gains/advantage of lattice sieve in details, and also on the choice of the parameters C and D.
Thanks in advance. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Bamboozled!
"๐บ๐๐ท๐ท๐ญ"
May 2003
Down not across
101101111110102 Posts |
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Sep 2009
11·223 Posts |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Apr 2013
28 Posts |
![]()
Thanks. But I am implementing the lattice sieve proposed by J. M. Pollard, where special-q's are taken as medium primes (B_0<q<B_1; B_1 being the bound on the factor base primes and B_0 varies between 0.1-0.5 fraction of B_1). Then we sieve for EVERY q in that range. Instead if we line sieve for all primes <B_1 (where every prime is used only once) and then report the smooth candidates, won't it consume less time? It is not clear to me.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
More NFS@Home 16e Lattice Sieve V5 wu's needed | pinhodecarlos | NFS@Home | 46 | 2018-03-12 22:43 |
SIEVE GAP | pepi37 | Other Mathematical Topics | 2 | 2016-03-19 06:55 |
Line sieving vs. lattice sieving | JHansen | NFSNET Discussion | 9 | 2010-06-09 19:25 |
46k sieve, max. n = 5M | Cruelty | Riesel Prime Search | 11 | 2010-03-10 22:15 |
Which sieve to use for n^n-1? | Siemelink | Factoring | 11 | 2006-11-08 18:08 |