2^877-1 polynomial selection - Page 2

axn · 2009-06-02, 15:32

224 done. Best was a 7.59

smh · 2009-06-02, 17:38

200, just to see how long it takes

Andi47 · 2009-06-02, 17:40

reserving 47

henryzz · 2009-06-02, 17:47

have possible parameters been found for msieve's new poly selection for this size number?
would it be worth running it on this number?

jasonp · 2009-06-02, 18:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by henryzz

have possible parameters been found for msieve's new poly selection for this size number?
would it be worth running it on this number?

I haven't had the time to add Tom's work on poly selection parameters for big jobs, and my experience is that using msieve to help for a job this big would be a waste of effort. On the bright side, degree-4 and -6 poly selection is coming along nicely.

frmky · 2009-06-02, 18:08

300-360 is done. The best is 8.92e-14.
I'll take
frmky 500-600

henryzz · 2009-06-02, 18:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by frmky

300-360 is done. The best is 8.92e-14.

post it that is the best yet

10metreh · 2009-06-02, 19:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by jasonp

On the bright side, degree-4 and -6 poly selection is coming along nicely.

What size numbers are you intending to use that on!?

antiroach · 2009-06-02, 20:29

0-5 done, best found 8.15e-014.

Reserving 5-20, excluding 14

jasonp · 2009-06-02, 21:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by 10metreh

What size numbers are you intending to use that on!?

I have a theory that degree-6 polynomials might be better for some numbers below 200 digits, and the only reason that nobody has experimented with that is because nobody's polynomial selection has thus far improved upon pol5.

Right now stage 1 works for any degree (it's degree-agnostic in most places, another big advantage of Kleinjung's improved algorithm) and stage 2 is about half done. Making stage 2 work for degree 4 isn't too hard, but degree 6 requires a 3-dimensional root sieve which will be tricky.

Andi47 · 2009-06-03, 04:19

47 is done, best poly was 7.35e-14.

Pol51m0b printed boatloads of lines containing numbers with a "!" to screen (is this something like msieve's "integrator failed" error?) and only a fistful of lines to the .m file, so I guess that I've lost a significant amount of polys to this error.
BTW: My range was done with 32-bit-GGNFS.

2009-06-02, 20:29	#20
antiroach Jun 2003 F4₁₆ Posts	0-5 done, best found 8.15e-014. Reserving 5-20, excluding 14 Last fiddled with by antiroach on 2009-06-02 at 20:32

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Polynomial selection	Max0526	NFS@Home	9	2017-05-20 08:57
Distributed polynomial selection.	chris2be8	Factoring	17	2012-04-27 08:59
Updated polynomial selection	jasonp	Msieve	65	2011-05-01 19:06
GNFS polynomial selection	Unregistered	Information & Answers	3	2011-04-16 14:24
Polynomial selection	CRGreathouse	Factoring	2	2009-05-25 07:55

2009-06-02, 15:32	#12
axn Jun 2003 5,051 Posts	224 done. Best was a 7.59

2009-06-02, 17:38	#13
smh "Sander" Oct 2002 52.345322,5.52471 29×41 Posts	200, just to see how long it takes

2009-06-02, 17:40	#14
Andi47 Oct 2004 Austria 4662₈ Posts	reserving 47

2009-06-02, 17:47	#15
henryzz Just call me Henry "David" Sep 2007 Cambridge (GMT/BST) 2³×3×5×7² Posts	have possible parameters been found for msieve's new poly selection for this size number? would it be worth running it on this number?

2009-06-02, 18:08	#17
frmky Jul 2003 So Cal 83A₁₆ Posts	300-360 is done. The best is 8.92e-14. I'll take frmky 500-600

2009-06-03, 04:19	#22
Andi47 Oct 2004 Austria 2482₁₀ Posts	47 is done, best poly was 7.35e-14. Pol51m0b printed boatloads of lines containing numbers with a "!" to screen (is this something like msieve's "integrator failed" error?) and only a fistful of lines to the .m file, so I guess that I've lost a significant amount of polys to this error. BTW: My range was done with 32-bit-GGNFS.