mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Other Stuff > Archived Projects > NFSNET Discussion

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 2005-06-30, 11:55   #1
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

22×5×373 Posts
Arrow 2,749+

2,749+ has been completed:

2,791+ is sieving.

2,749+ C189 = p58.p132

p58 = 1067740385407532831676124118528135895750892746743123583547
p132 = 265168210875294435131691485888315426328518887962256780931238822948289856657586504113363655596519745405902488698615900864762882650843
R.D. Silverman is offline  
Old 2005-06-30, 12:15   #2
Wacky
 
Wacky's Avatar
 
Jun 2003
The Texas Hill Country

32·112 Posts
Default

Thanks for the factor, Bob. Good work! I'm sure that Sam will be happy to get it.

Just to make sure that we don't confuse casual readers, 2,749+ and 2,791+ are numbers that Bob is doing independently of the NFSNet structure.

NFSNet is currently working on 2,751+ and will then quickly do 2,760+.

Richard
Wacky is offline  
Old 2005-06-30, 13:03   #3
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

11101001001002 Posts
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wacky
Thanks for the factor, Bob. Good work! I'm sure that Sam will be happy to get it.

Just to make sure that we don't confuse casual readers, 2,749+ and 2,791+ are numbers that Bob is doing independently of the NFSNet structure.

NFSNet is currently working on 2,751+ and will then quickly do 2,760+.

Richard
I assume you are doing 2,760+ with GNFS? It is a borderline choice.

Why do this one ahead of 2,719+ and 2,736+??? These latter two are
"first holes".
R.D. Silverman is offline  
Old 2005-06-30, 14:35   #4
Wacky
 
Wacky's Avatar
 
Jun 2003
The Texas Hill Country

108910 Posts
Default

I'm doing 2,760+ next because that is the one that Paul set up. You'll have to ask him why he chose it in preference to one of the others. I don't know if it is the case here, but sometimes we have skipped some of the easier ones to leave more managable ones to those with smaller sieving capacity.

The original intent was to do it by gnfs, partly to help some less knowledgable people realize that NFSNet can do either gnfs or snfs since they are essentially the same once you have chosen the polynomials.

After Don and ? did some searching, I think that they concluded that the SNFS was just as good. It seems that Paul went with

M = 2^152
M -x
1 -x +x^2 -x^3 +x^4

Last fiddled with by Wacky on 2005-06-30 at 14:44 Reason: Spellling error -- I hate web interfaces for posting
Wacky is offline  
Old 2005-06-30, 15:39   #5
xilman
Bamboozled!
 
xilman's Avatar
 
"π’‰Ίπ’ŒŒπ’‡·π’†·π’€­"
May 2003
Down not across

101010011000002 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wacky
I'm doing 2,760+ next because that is the one that Paul set up. You'll have to ask him why he chose it in preference to one of the others. I don't know if it is the case here, but sometimes we have skipped some of the easier ones to leave more managable ones to those with smaller sieving capacity.

The original intent was to do it by gnfs, partly to help some less knowledgable people realize that NFSNet can do either gnfs or snfs since they are essentially the same once you have chosen the polynomials.

After Don and ? did some searching, I think that they concluded that the SNFS was just as good. It seems that Paul went with

M = 2^152
M -x
1 -x +x^2 -x^3 +x^4

Warning: I've just got back from the other Cambridge and haven't slept properly in several days, so I not be entirely coherent.

I think we decided that it would be a Good Thing to clear the 2+ and 2- tables to 768 bits. There are only a few of these left and, to me, it doesn't seem to matter that much whether any particular order is chosen to achieve that goal.

As Richard said, NFSNET has somewhat greater resources than some people/teams and it makes sense for us to concentrate on somewhat harder factorizations.

What with a business trip and serious hardware problems, I had to set up the parameters for the next NFSNET project in rather a hurry. So that the params were certain to be ready in time I didn't spend a long time mulling over alternatives.

Don and JesH found that the quartic SNFS was rather more productive than the best GNFS quintic polynomial they discovered. Though not markedly so, it was still more than "marginally" better. I based my choice on their discovery.

Paul
xilman is online now  
Old 2005-07-05, 02:37   #6
junky
 
junky's Avatar
 
Jan 2004

7·19 Posts
Default

Just as curiosity:
What's the pending projects for NFSnet?
1) 2,751+
2) 2,760+
3) 2,719+
4) 2,736+
what's next after?
any expectations for these projects?


And the current version of the client has not changed since a couple of months now. Is there any plans for this? I think an offline client is crucial, which could make a huge impact in the process if sieving.
I know Bob has started something about an offline client for *nix platforms, anything for windows?
So what's the plan about all that please?
junky is offline  
 

Thread Tools


All times are UTC. The time now is 04:27.


Wed Sep 22 04:27:34 UTC 2021 up 60 days, 22:56, 0 users, load averages: 1.94, 1.94, 1.97

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.