Fast Breeding (guru management)

[Dubslow]

Originally Posted by fivemack

May I call a moratorium on adding new 14e entries while we have 12 essentially fully-sieved ones without a post-processor?

I'll trade you my ill-advised OPN sieving reservation in exchange for throwing my cpu at the backlog.

It's 5366319547249^17-1. I already ECMd it and did ~7-8% of the sieving.

Here's the nfs.job produced by yafu (I didn't so much as glance at it):

n: 472960072945324790649011915544651834111300001518282847576455281830793231297779413258575139633668465686989918552066685480742698827004361914871104648190206574311733982073446748764526700801777229738140122001
# 5366319547249^17-1, difficulty: 229.13, anorm: 1.26e+38, rnorm: 1.34e+43
# scaled difficulty: 229.13, suggest sieving algebraic side
# size = 1.988e-12, alpha = 0.000, combined = 2.066e-13, rroots = 2
type: snfs
size: 229
skew: 132.3161
c6: 1
c0: -5366319547249
Y1: -1
Y0: 154535972628089443284732002908839079249
m: 154535972628089443284732002908839079249

rlim: 36800000
alim: 36800000
lpbr: 31
lpba: 31
mfbr: 62
mfba: 62
rlambda: 2.6
alambda: 2.6

Note the recommendation to sieve algebraic side.

I'm not sure where exactly yafu started sieving, but a reproduction indicates it started at 18.4M. I have completed up to 32.96M with a yield of ~1.15 rel/q in the most recent batch of 160K spq, making for a total so far of ~17.5M rels. Yafu suggested 181M minrels for filtering so 200M is probably a good target to overshoot. So perhaps 180M more spq from nfs@home, say 33M-210M or 215M or so depending on how much the yields decline (I don't recall). Does that sound reasonable? (I will complete the 32.96M-33M gap, and do the post processing as well.)

[VBCurtis]

Originally Posted by Dubslow

rlim: 36800000
alim: 36800000
So perhaps 180M more spq from nfs@home, say 33M-210M or 215M or so depending on how much the yields decline (I don't recall). Does that sound reasonable? (I will complete the 32.96M-33M gap, and do the post processing as well.)

Sieving a job to Q=200M when lim's are 36M does not sound reasonable, no. Neither does yield under 1.5 in the good part of the sieve region. This job should be run with alim/rlim of 134M, or higher.

The classic advice that yield below 2.0 indicates some parameter changes are in order applies here. I would personally also change to 32LP, but I recognise that I'm in the minority for my large-LP choices. Changing alim/rlim to 134M or 180M might get yield near 2.0, but I can't say I understand why 31LP would be better than 32 here.

Test-sieving saves more time than it costs.

[Dubslow]

Originally Posted by VBCurtis

Sieving a job to Q=200M when lim's are 36M does not sound reasonable, no. Neither does yield under 1.5 in the good part of the sieve region. This job should be run with alim/rlim of 134M, or higher.

The classic advice that yield below 2.0 indicates some parameter changes are in order applies here. I would personally also change to 32LP, but I recognise that I'm in the minority for my large-LP choices. Changing alim/rlim to 134M or 180M might get yield near 2.0, but I can't say I understand why 31LP would be better than 32 here.

Test-sieving saves more time than it costs.

I "blame" yafu ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Edit: Here's its table, which is admittedly not optimized for SNFS:

/* note: min_rels column is no longer used - it is equation based and	*/
/* is filled in by get_ggnfs_params					*/
/* columns:								*/
/* digits, r/alim, lpbr/a, mfbr/a, r/alambda, siever, min-rels, q-range */
	{85,  900000,   24, 48, 2.1, 11, 0, 10000},
	{90,  1200000,  25, 50, 2.3, 11, 0, 10000},
	{95,  1500000,  25, 50, 2.5, 12, 0, 20000},
	{100, 1800000,  26, 52, 2.5, 12, 0, 20000},
	{105, 2500000,  26, 52, 2.5, 12, 0, 20000},
	{110, 3200000,  26, 52, 2.5, 13, 0, 40000},
	{115, 4500000,  27, 54, 2.5, 13, 0, 40000},
	{120, 5500000,  27, 54, 2.5, 13, 0, 40000},
	{125, 7000000,  27, 54, 2.5, 13, 0, 40000},
	{130, 9000000,  28, 56, 2.5, 13, 0, 80000},
	{135, 11500000, 28, 56, 2.6, 14, 0, 80000},
	{140, 14000000, 28, 56, 2.6, 14, 0, 80000},
	{145, 19000000, 28, 56, 2.6, 14, 0, 80000},
	{150, 25000000, 29, 58, 2.6, 14, 0, 160000},
	{155, 32000000, 29, 58, 2.6, 14, 0, 160000},	
	{160, 40000000, 30, 60, 2.6, 14, 0, 160000},	// snfs 232
	{165, 49000000, 30, 60, 2.6, 14, 0, 160000},	// 241
	{170, 59000000, 31, 62, 2.6, 14, 0, 320000},	// 250
	{175, 70000000, 31, 62, 2.6, 15, 0, 320000},	// 259
	{180, 82000000, 31, 62, 2.6, 15, 0, 320000},	// 267
	{185, 100000000, 32, 64, 2.6, 16, 0, 320000}
};

The code makes adjustments for yields >4 rel/spq or <1 rel/spq; the given params came up at less than 1, so it upped the bits to 31. (>8 rel/spq = lower siever, < 1/2 rel/spq = higher siever)

[swellman]

Originally Posted by fivemack

I make it about 15000 curves @ B1=260M (this is a bit more than previous versions of ecm-toy suggest, because I've updated the prior for factor distribution based on experience with the brilliant-numbers search)

A slightly more optimal search would be 15000 @ 43M followed by 12000 @ 260M if the number survived the first lot.

Please mail marin DOT mersennus AT gmail DOT com to reserve the number.

15120 curves @B1=43M yielded no factors. Now running 12000 curves @t60 level. Marin has been updated.

[Dubslow]

PARAMETERS SELECTED (31-bit lp; alim=rlim=134000000) AND QUEUED

Originally Posted by Dubslow

I'll trade you my ill-advised OPN sieving reservation in exchange for throwing my cpu at the backlog.

It's 5366319547249^17-1. I already ECMd it and did ~7-8% of the sieving.

Here's the nfs.job produced by yafu (I didn't so much as glance at it):

n: 472960072945324790649011915544651834111300001518282847576455281830793231297779413258575139633668465686989918552066685480742698827004361914871104648190206574311733982073446748764526700801777229738140122001
# 5366319547249^17-1, difficulty: 229.13, anorm: 1.26e+38, rnorm: 1.34e+43
# scaled difficulty: 229.13, suggest sieving algebraic side
# size = 1.988e-12, alpha = 0.000, combined = 2.066e-13, rroots = 2
type: snfs
size: 229
skew: 132.3161
c6: 1
c0: -5366319547249
Y1: -1
Y0: 154535972628089443284732002908839079249
m: 154535972628089443284732002908839079249

Note the recommendation to sieve algebraic side.

I would still like for 14e to sieve this, though I obviously need some help with the parameter selection. Any takers?

[swellman]

QUEUED Next term in AS 4788 is a C167. Yoyo@Home ran it up to a full t55, and VBCurtis found a very good poly - thanks to both for their efforts. Not sure if/when the moratorium on the queues will be fully lifted, just parking this job here for use when needed. I will not have more 14e candidates until late November.

15e jobs - I have a couple in the pipe whenever they are needed.

n: 17836284178544632533542177396765800795130282738703934751781697055497914407582438994518501693989751069293655786255415284196091460190684162535720450721416707626752884161
# size 3.385e-16, alpha -7.920, combined = 5.956e-13 rroots = 5
skew: 18358107.69
c0: 103884462589639482345566009768214320572000
c1: 47191213555613539104636642858135210
c2: 1454356932206018793505452993
c3: -470345432281617508754
c4: -619088058732
c5: 308880
Y0: -142004765472725557951356006205383
Y1: 3703011190457693
rlim: 134000000
alim: 134000000
lpbr: 31
lpba: 31
mfbr: 62
mfba: 62
rlambda: 2.7
alambda: 2.7

Test sieving on the -a side with Q in blocks of 4K:

20M   9536
40M   10707
60M   9934
80M   10882
100M  10226
120M  10394

Suggesting a sieving range for Q of 20M-120M with a target # rels = 250M

[fivemack]

It looks like we're pretty much ready to open the floodgates; I'll put in that one, may I ask for some idea of ETAs on the four post-processing jobs that you are doing?

Bring out your 15e jobs!

[swellman]

Originally Posted by fivemack

It looks like we're pretty much ready to open the floodgates; I'll put in that one, may I ask for some idea of ETAs on the four post-processing jobs that you are doing?

Bring out your 15e jobs!

C223_129_100 ETA 17 November

C202_137_75 ETA mid-December (it’s a big job)

C224_122_119 ETA late Nov (don’t recall exact date)

C229_150_58 Starting job tonight, so 2+ weeks?

I’ve also got some 15e jobs that will finish this week and 20 Nov


I’ll post a 15e candidate shortly.

[swellman]

QUEUED C200_135_88 is ready for SNFS on the 15e siever.

n: 87888332475755296961160995965639013959918156535124288327434175564493189194993141607274211531949886272329138895486432621875007098222115288915997789288737554603190432640638541724510406248622624413988507
# 135^88+88^135, difficulty: 263.41, anorm: 1.03e+039, rnorm: -3.40e+049
# scaled difficulty: 265.16, suggest sieving rational side
# size = 2.487e-013, alpha = 0.000, combined = 4.294e-014, rroots = 0
type: snfs
size: 263
skew: 8.0205
c6: 1
c0: 266200
Y1: -12012925478682801599137321597819550997413888
Y0: 30052822942615088894073486328125
rlim: 268000000
alim: 268000000
lpbr: 32
lpba: 32
mfbr: 64
mfba: 64
rlambda: 2.8
alambda: 2.8

Test sieving on the -r side with Q in blocks of 2K.

30M    5052
70M    4386
120M   3904
180M   3279
250M   3367
350M   2901

Suggesting a sieving range for Q of 30M-290M with target # rels=480M.

[swellman]

QUEUED C215_130_99

n: 49833630031446805341523223993061272887629988252880330172671039060813272703554720631108598527222934821038478746162246504104818695035957246494264592630202337337346670352247722604197417048988702850161044500560323748007
# 130^99+99^130, difficulty: 260.64, anorm: 6.45e+031, rnorm: -8.86e+057
# scaled difficulty: 264.99, suggest sieving rational side
# size = 6.173e-018, alpha = 0.000, combined = 3.385e-014, rroots = 1
type: snfs
size: 260
skew: 1.3236
c5: 16
c0: 65
Y1: -7700431458051553042886520966464507199573692403247401
Y0: 950248188744039971940050000000000000000000
rlim: 268000000
alim: 268000000
lpbr: 32
lpba: 32
mfbr: 64
mfba: 64
rlambda: 2.8
alambda: 2.8

Test sieving on the -r side with Q in blocks of 2K.

30M    3354
80M    3466
150M   4010
220M   4105
300M   4017

Suggesting a sieving range of 20M-275M with target # rels = 470M.

[RichD]

QUEUED C163 from the OPN t600 file.

n: 1080503066106698087586651991457465043992609984173528684616009612564813602539917546985969119922603598826633275314005441990327850900855723687104437297639104182503667
# 63681511996418550459487^11-1, difficulty: 228.04, skewness: 1.00, alpha: 2.22
# cost: 1.48216e+18, est. time: 705.79 GHz days (not accurate yet!)
skew: 1.000
c5: 1
c4: 1
c3: -4
c2: -3
c1: 3
c0: 1
Y1: -63681511996418550459487
Y0: 4055334970149999756229680589499240778828303170
m: 975438631458606076956362077526239768614756593443760699997211032530612672659366554391382838653531635504376112870487663508483370080735381036907976734909040979270411
type: snfs
rlim: 67000000
alim: 67000000
lpbr: 30
lpba: 30
mfbr: 60
mfba: 60
rlambda: 2.6
alambda: 2.6

Trial sieving 5K blocks.

 Q  Yield
20M 10384
50M 10334
80M  9217