20161013, 05:34  #144  
Noodles
"Mr. Tuch"
Dec 2007
Chennai, India
4E9_{16} Posts 
Quote:
because in my own created up Mersenne Wiki web site page, (currently maintained up by using Jyb, Wreck and Shaopu Lin?) it is being in SNFS Quartics list, not GNFS list. NFS@Home has been reserving up numbers looking up at the my own constructed up Mersenne Wiki web site page tables at all? Is it easier by using SNFS Quartic rather than GNFS? It is closer off. But I think that NFS@Home is right now in form of doing with GNFS candidates instead of SNFS Quartic, or Quintic or Sextic. That along with 2,2562L c196 from formerly added up extension tables is being in SNFS Quartics list, not GNFS list. NFS@Home has been getting reserved up with all GNFS candidate numbers up to c208 including the old one 2,1285 c218. Numbers like 3,619 c207 and 3,671 c205 (right now reserved by using Ryan Propper) might have been got easier by using SNFS Sextic, not by using GNFS at all! I will be updating with Mersenne Wiki tables sooner right now, along with Cunningham number tables, Fibonacci and Lucas number tables, Homogeneous Cunningham number tables in their own beautiful coloured derived prime factors format! It would be good enough to have with Java Script enabled or PHP enabled in to Mersenne Wiki web site page to automate with submission process of prime factors at all! May be that many an other people like it up? Or not? Last fiddled with by Raman on 20161013 at 05:48 

20161013, 14:15  #145  
Noodles
"Mr. Tuch"
Dec 2007
Chennai, India
3·419 Posts 
Quote:
Then they could be becoming with Smaller but needed GNFS candidates! With the state of art, some of these candidates it may be that easier by using GNFS rather than by using SNFS quartic or quintic or sextic polynomial candidates. Up on the my own created up and constructed up Mersenne Wiki web site page, it might be that needing up as like some adjusting up type of thing at all, any way some how every day. 12,299+ c202 3,748+ c204 Of the form 3,619 c207 7,356+ c207 2,2330L c207 2,1037+ c209 3,643+ c210 2,2330M c210 Skipped up, snipped up 2,2210M c211 3,715 c211 12,305+ c212 7,833M c212 11,293+ c212 2,1100+ c213 Cf. What does <snip>, 12,274+ c213 2,1240+ c216 3,725 c217 2,1165+ c217 3,820+ c218 11,334+ c219 <skip>, Cf. mean out? 3,631+ c219 2,2126M c219 7,395 c220 2,1255 c220 7,413 c220 3,632+ c220 Have been got with 7,403+ c220 3,815 c220 2,2494M c221 11,649L c221 7,395+ c221 7,425 c221 3,718+ c222 ... It might be that good enough up to having been got with sorting up by using size or length rather than instead of difficulty of candidates SNFS quartic or quintic or sextic polynomial candidates. 10 Most Wanted numbers. 24 More Wanted numbers. How many Smaller but needed numbers? 2,2158M c193 (Reserved up by using Texas State HPC  Don Hazlewood) 3,671 c205 (Reserved up by using Ryan Propper) Last fiddled with by Raman on 20161013 at 14:16 

20161013, 15:05  #146 
"Bo Chen"
Oct 2005
Wuhan,China
2·83 Posts 
R650
About 10,325+, here is some informations I have sent to Kurt.
20150801 Code:
I have explain the step to get combined value of polynomial through sina email, and I think other two persons maybe interest in it. For number larger than snfs 220 (again I forgot the accurate number, or we just do not know it), we should use degree 6, if we do not use degree 6, than there will be a penalty. Some one says for a degree 10, the penalty is 60. This maybe the reason why Yousuke is still doing 1620L. For degree 4, I get the formula from you from another person (sorry I forgot his name), this formula is some thing like,for a degree 4, its real diff value is (snfs 4 difficulty) * 6 / 4  (a constant value) I forgot the accurate constant value is , maybe is 40. So , for R650, its difficulty is 260 * 6/440=350, it is more than 300, to get the accurate value, I test its speed, and found its speed is 18 sec/rel. about 32 times slower than R423. While Max use lpba=31, for a number if its lpba increase 1, its rel collect speed will increase 2 time (while needed relations will increase 2 times too). For snfs number, when the diff increase 10, its speed will slower 2 times, My test speed using lpba=32 for R423 is 0.6 sec/rel, if I use lpba=31, its speed will be 1.2 sec/rel. So the real speed of test R650 is 16 times than R423. so R650's real difficulty (equivalent to snfs 6) is (R423's snfs diff) + 10 * log2(16) =282 + 10 * 4 =322 Code:
For R650, I think after R2700M relation collect is done , and when that time NFS@Home does not reserve it, you could reserve it from Wagstaff. It should done by you and Max, Wenjie, etc with 6 months. 
20161030, 15:58  #147 
"Max"
Jun 2016
Toronto
2×3×7×17 Posts 
A very good poly for 10,515+ c199
Found by CADONFS, optimized by Msieve:
Code:
Msieve v. 1.52 (SVN 958) R0: 429873155922929313315767352804496526959 R1: 1173407499622534153549 A0: 4123232726098214293264497150572823602694091032000 A1: 15046303477474735468514048031694219326776 A2: 1269995212430296791873190620103689 A3: 2988888945327618127510111 A4: 23844831853933266 A5: 6981480 skew 249134139.39, size 1.372e019, alpha 8.945, combined = 4.999e015 
20161031, 06:05  #148 
"Max"
Jun 2016
Toronto
2×3×7×17 Posts 
A better poly for 10,515+ c199
After some more root sieve in CADONFS:
Code:
Msieve v. 1.52 (SVN 958) R0: 429873155894842908328972286223207900523 R1: 1173407499622534153549 A0: 921152784545133512672868444928211620544589981840 A1: 39293694975142056979694617415210276238112 A2: 972446599487622683766964276896261 A3: 5311864367775954917911807 A4: 24680367142186866 A5: 6981480 skew 232590778.72, size 1.422e019, alpha 9.026, combined = 5.111e015 
20161212, 16:04  #149 
"Beschorner Kurt"
Jul 2016
Germany
24_{8} Posts 
10,515,+ reserving  Team effort
I am reserving 10,515,+/c199 for our team.
Team: Max0526, wreck2002, Wenjie Fang, Alfred Eichhorn and I. Someone wants to join our group (for R515,+)? Kurt Last fiddled with by Batalov on 20161212 at 22:04 
20161215, 21:23  #150 
Jul 2003
So Cal
2,069 Posts 
10,325+ is done.

20170313, 04:40  #151 
"Max"
Jun 2016
Toronto
2×3×7×17 Posts 
polys to consider for c199 10,515+
@kurtb
After CADO's second approach: Code:
# norm 1.587617e019 alpha 6.405212 e 4.818e015 rroots 3 skew: 244424374.97 c0: 61273646333056248631393145049744489856776032064 c1: 10420727777495411411387820457257803823560 c2: 145201440064897386425846123841612 c3: 259088764547269247676230 c4: 3111278570304511 c5: 1252800 Y0: 262207264182244965566501989754094701687 Y1: 35260964440695209765221 Code:
Y0: 260505402482337066318147974102921098728 Y1: 7716435693806557117099 c0: 1654261163502007156972422319406119913455210822815 c1: 26384190129329608515063756157530472625990 c2: 203788580791257674994807537648741 c3: 3672705324080165167457858 c4: 4687498736820054 c5: 11648340 skew: 236770061.88 # size 1.304e019, alpha 7.791, combined = 4.866e015 rroots = 3 Code:
Y0: 429873155923612753953255001219423760068 Y1: 1173407499622534153549 c0: 3684169692376062463639486252058906152472281984050 c1: 16528721029913580823331834978501372839223 c2: 1275169246253808999055456284843666 c3: 2933359798287776393299687 c4: 23824500352969866 c5: 6981480 skew: 248078670.32 # size 1.332e19, alpha 8.860, combined = 4.905e15 rroots = 5 Code:
Y0: 256801803982980786519466270774361363475 Y1: 46489253566470781807399 c0: 394135635881473880558342455190986592866466927488 c1: 4990753553766026834416226588003267492240 c2: 176630505265024070591230831366460 c3: 5116291946618703658808340 c4: 9192608450724867 c5: 9732240 skew: 236539316.33698 # alpha 8.23, 3 real roots # MurphyE=5.01099448e15 
20170314, 07:53  #152 
"Beschorner Kurt"
Jul 2016
Germany
10100_{2} Posts 
thank you Max.
sieving start: March 16 10,1350M/c197: postprocessing start with TD=130: March 19 Kurt 
20170317, 17:28  #153 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK
4867_{10} Posts 
Code:
10, 302+ c289 188981422179250214477885038956646476812007525220846625175628245017547495717341304519447280552146559165713534073382085460954497219653965265520569. p146 NFS@Home snfs Last fiddled with by pinhodecarlos on 20170317 at 17:31 
20170507, 14:42  #154 
"Bo Chen"
Oct 2005
Wuhan,China
2·83 Posts 
10,1350M is factored
10,1350M is factored by Team "Bo Chen, Wenjie Fang, Maksym Voznyy, Alfred Eichhorn and Kurt Beschorner".
c197 = p83 * p114 The polynomial is found by Maksym using CADO, with a negative c5, which trigger a problem when doing the postprocessing's nc3 stage. After change each coefficients of algebraic and rational polynomial, and then doing the nc3, the factors pop out successfully. I guess, perhaps it is possible to do this step automatically after give some modification to the msieve code when A5 is negative. Postprocessing log is attached. 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
5+ table  garo  Cunningham Tables  100  20210104 22:36 
7+ table  garo  Cunningham Tables  86  20210104 22:35 
6+ table  garo  Cunningham Tables  80  20210104 22:33 
5 table  garo  Cunningham Tables  82  20200315 21:47 
6 table  garo  Cunningham Tables  41  20160804 04:24 