mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > NFS@Home

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2009-09-10, 08:08   #23
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

59·163 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by debrouxl View Post
I've performed some polynomial selection for C157_105_74 and C152_107_66...
Sorry, dude, but what for? They have very simple polynomials.

Both difficulty 197, easily done on a single home computer in a fairly short time. You have to pick up some theory. Not every wall deserves to be knocked down with one's forehead.
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-10, 09:08   #24
frmky
 
frmky's Avatar
 
Jul 2003
So Cal

24·139 Posts
Default

Oops! Sorry for stealing your thunder! Over the past year or so, I've been growing more frustrated with the state of NFSNet and had been contemplating trying a BOINC project for a while. Your success with the RSA keys, along with the time afforded by my sabbatical this semester, spurred me to action. The applications that I'm using are based on your code modified to support the other sievers, catch more exit conditions, pass sieve ranges on the command line rather than in the input file, and support 64-bit linux. I started with a ~220 digit SNFS, but that proved too small. The current contributors are doing a ~246 digit SNFS in less than a week, and it's still growing.

I'll be happy to share the modified code with you, and I certainly don't mind you going ahead with your plans. I plan to mostly do Cunningham composites. You could concentrate on others, such as XYYXF, OddPerfect, and ElevenSmooth composites.
frmky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-10, 09:44   #25
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

22×5×373 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frmky View Post
Oops! Sorry for stealing your thunder! Over the past year or so, I've been growing more frustrated with the state of NFSNet and had been contemplating trying a BOINC project for a while. Your success with the RSA keys, along with the time afforded by my sabbatical this semester, spurred me to action. The applications that I'm using are based on your code modified to support the other sievers, catch more exit conditions, pass sieve ranges on the command line rather than in the input file, and support 64-bit linux. I started with a ~220 digit SNFS, but that proved too small. The current contributors are doing a ~246 digit SNFS in less than a week, and it's still growing.

I'll be happy to share the modified code with you, and I certainly don't mind you going ahead with your plans. I plan to mostly do Cunningham composites. You could concentrate on others, such as XYYXF, OddPerfect, and ElevenSmooth composites.

The Fibonacci/Lucas numbers have a much longer history and tradition
than these last 3..........
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-10, 09:48   #26
fivemack
(loop (#_fork))
 
fivemack's Avatar
 
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England

644410 Posts
Default polynomial selection for XYYX is really easy

Hello debrouxl

Code:
n: 17075208162502696769894374083900022560666476082993604775871225203067880924979815162772202343023227879807349366915642555719257659222044063449483070644063
skew: 0.5
c6: 66
c0: 1
Y0: 21048519522998348950643
Y1: 564664961438246926567398233604096
is a reasonable polynomial for C152_107_66;

Code:
n: 1958662481641326248094427703301790313367601031324000981342287598641007898602778576888614085103799825026482689632839088276269469580340645292584464747639935853
skew: 0.4
c0: 105
c5: 1
Y1: 1794180426060713946801538628555399757824
Y0: -2078928179411367257720947265625
should be OK for C157_105_74.

basically you've got, say, 103^55 + 55^103, and you want to write a small multiple of it as a sum of small multiples of fifth or sixth powers.

so it would be 103*(103^9)^6 + 55*(55^17)^6
which you do as c0 = 103, c6 = 55, and either Y0 = 103^9, Y1=55^17 or the other way round, depending on a convention that I don't quite know: I try both, and for one of them the siever gives an error message. If you're using fifth powers, you also need to fiddle with choice of sign until the siever stops complaining. Scientific method, don't you just love it?

Last fiddled with by fivemack on 2009-09-10 at 09:53
fivemack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-10, 09:51   #27
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

59·163 Posts
Default

...And there are some Cullen and Woodall's.
W951 is particularly appealing.
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-10, 09:59   #28
debrouxl
 
debrouxl's Avatar
 
Sep 2009

97810 Posts
Default

Batalov: yeah, I'll easily admit that I haven't picked a lot of theory
Someone suggested a 149-digit xyyxf number at
http://www.unitedti.org/index.php?sh...dpost&p=135938 (and later posts), so I just tried several other 150-160 digit numbers from the "wanted" list of that project, and wanted to feed them to the rsals grid so as to prevent starvation (and therefore people detaching, weakening the grid).

fivemack: thanks for the explanation

frmky: don't worry, I wholeheartedly agree that there's room for multiple BOINC projects, each of them dealing with a kind of number, with collaboration between these similar projects
You did it completely right to go forward with improving squalyl's and FloppusMaximus' initial work. You seem to have time on your hands, and you're putting it to good use

everybody: from tonight to next Wednesday or Thursday, it's likely that I'll be without Internet access at all... so don't worry if I don't reply.
debrouxl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-10, 10:02   #29
fivemack
(loop (#_fork))
 
fivemack's Avatar
 
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England

644410 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batalov View Post
...And there are some Cullen and Woodall's.
W951 is particularly appealing.
You spelled 'appalling' wrong

That one's probably over the 32-33 boundary; I don't know whether the issue with >32-bit large primes in msieve is that they don't fit in 32 bits, in which case a simple encoding like

(p<210)?p:210+48*(p/210)+lut[p%210]

gets you to 34 bits, or something a whole lot more subtle.

I don't need a 4x4 compute cluster with infiniband interconnect
I don't need a 4x4 compute cluster with infiniband interconnect
I don't need a 4x4 compute cluster with infiniband interconnect
A 4x4 compute cluster with infiniband interconnect only uses a kilowatt, and it's probably not very much louder than a quite loud vacuum cleaner running 24/7, and it costs under £3000, and think of the matrices you could do, and now that Lynnfield is out it's a lot faster than the one I specced with Shanghais
I don't need a 4x4 compute cluster with infiniband interconnect
I don't need a 4x4 compute cluster with infiniband interconnect
I don't need a 4x4 compute cluster with infiniband interconnect

Last fiddled with by fivemack on 2009-09-10 at 10:19
fivemack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-10, 12:18   #30
jasonp
Tribal Bullet
 
jasonp's Avatar
 
Oct 2004

3×1,181 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fivemack View Post
That one's probably over the 32-33 boundary; I don't know whether the issue with >32-bit large primes in msieve is that they don't fit in 32 bits, in which case a simple encoding like

(p<210)?p:210+48*(p/210)+lut[p%210]

gets you to 34 bits, or something a whole lot more subtle.
It just involves a lot of small changes to the initial filtering and linear algebra stages, modifications of data structures, etc. Actually the big reason I haven't gotten to it is that I wanted to use the changes as an excuse to implement run-length compression of lists of primes or lists of ideals. The hardest part is extending code that finds roots of polynomials mod p to p > 2^32

@debrouxl: welcome to the forum :) As fivemack demonstrated, there are tricks that make NFS dramatically easier when your input is not an RSA key; perhaps you should let us know how you'd like to pitch in to any of the ongoing projects here, once you decide.

Last fiddled with by jasonp on 2009-09-10 at 13:27
jasonp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-10, 12:53   #31
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

22·5·373 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonp View Post
The hardest part is extending code that finds roots of polynomials mod p to p > 2^32
When do you use this? AFAIK we still are not close to using a factor
base with elements > 2^32.....?
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-10, 12:54   #32
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

22×5×373 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frmky View Post
Over the past year or so, I've been growing more frustrated with the state of NFSNet .
Join the club!!!!!
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-10, 12:58   #33
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

22·5·373 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batalov View Post
...And there are some Cullen and Woodall's.
W951 is particularly appealing.
How about doing the first two holes in the base 12 tables?

Among all of the first five holes in all the tables, these have been
there the longest.
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Boinc Statistics for NFS@Home borked ? thomasn NFS@Home 1 2013-10-02 15:31
BOINC NFS sieving - RSALS debrouxl NFS@Home 621 2012-12-14 23:44
BOINC? masser Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5 1 2009-02-09 01:10
BOINC? KEP Twin Prime Search 212 2007-04-25 10:29
BOINC bebarce Software 3 2005-12-15 18:35

All times are UTC. The time now is 14:41.


Sun Dec 5 14:41:37 UTC 2021 up 135 days, 9:10, 1 user, load averages: 0.93, 1.06, 1.08

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.