![]() |
|
|
#474 |
|
"William"
May 2003
New Haven
2·7·132 Posts |
This has had ECM to 2/9 the SNFS size by yoyo@home.
251101831^29-1 Last fiddled with by wblipp on 2016-04-11 at 02:42 Reason: 241^125-1 isn't ready yet |
|
|
|
|
|
#475 |
|
(loop (#_fork))
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England
23·11·73 Posts |
OK, I've queued up 251101831^29-1. It would be nice if somebody could do a bit more polynomial selection on C177_148_94, but if the queue drains again I would be inclined to queue up VBCurtis's preliminary polynomial. I'm afraid my systems are all committed to other things for at least the next week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#476 |
|
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
2·2,437 Posts |
I've reached 10 days on the C195 from 4788 without improving on Rich's poly (in fact, I found no poly over 1e-14, so not within 5%). I'll move to the C177, since there's an immediate need.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#477 |
|
Sep 2009
977 Posts |
After test sieving on 14e, I suggest targeting two XYYXF numbers at 15e:
* for C226_118_109, snfspoly produces a sextic with decent-looking coefficients: Code:
n: 2188631741508591403562986651632391146379880884734645955005812183277583487899017905891245273673542274647836721631476604265405152233693016534178740852390420954793799826044483718604333023557056283828855655156707029152010737589839 deg: 6 c6: 118 c5: 0 c4: 0 c3: 0 c2: 0 c1: 0 c0: 141158161 Y1: 514166125484246966737602341678133311989 Y0: -19673250936660415417029531820024397824 type: snfs skew: 10.3031652179546 rlim: 134217727 alim: 134217727 lpbr: 31 lpba: 31 mfbr: 62 mfba: 62 rlambda: 2.6 alambda: 2.6 * likewise, C213_119_103 sieves badly, below 1 rel/q and ~0.5 s/rel at q=rlim/2=alim/2 here: Code:
n: 375891859168290888618515533403195981147472163511562214121431333874627860313286561493948705757702810931173654456742886255080215519359875888847846457536080441599565518163441566286826930121390202964824411348611499983 deg: 6 c6: 119 c5: 0 c4: 0 c3: 0 c2: 0 c1: 0 c0: 11592740743 Y1: 175350605307710078811389641512788920567 Y0: -192441327313530246357280390753883639 type: snfs skew: 21.450620542434 rlim: 134217727 alim: 134217727 lpbr: 31 lpba: 31 mfbr: 62 mfba: 62 rlambda: 2.6 alambda: 2.6 For reference: despite c6 and c0 being much higher, the sextic for C204_119_99 Code:
n: 479873652024788694867787610438213252055477100315679358935651957440860083358098397722970076875195892606226009323886570230485431162602984527677762711480271946889349965985508220148978699023308352816407973617 deg: 6 c6: 1685159 c5: 0 c4: 0 c3: 0 c2: 0 c1: 0 c0: 13045131 Y1: 247850587150676021481575351680101875697 Y0: -1617154011038069297120003283646081 type: snfs skew: 1.40648334377312 rlim: 134217727 alim: 134217727 lpbr: 31 lpba: 31 mfbr: 62 mfba: 62 rlambda: 2.6 alambda: 2.6 Last fiddled with by debrouxl on 2016-04-11 at 20:47 Reason: Adding info about the quintic for C204_119_99 |
|
|
|
|
|
#478 |
|
(loop (#_fork))
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England
191816 Posts |
Trial-sieving debrouxl's two polynomials with 15e/32LP, will enqueue tomorrow once I've figured out plausible parameters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#479 |
|
(loop (#_fork))
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England
11001000110002 Posts |
debrouxl's polynomials both enqueued (A-side yields at 15e/32LP ~3.0 for 119_103 and ~2.4 for 118_109). Aiming for 400M relations, which I think is quite strong oversieving for SNFS of that small a difficulty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#480 |
|
Sep 2009
977 Posts |
I think I've queued all numbers suitable for 14e which were posted here. The 14e part of the grid is not in danger of immediate starvation (that is, unless a sizable team decides to run for stats without caring about project management, as usual), but will be in several days
|
|
|
|
|
|
#481 |
|
Jan 2005
Minsk, Belarus
24·52 Posts |
C206_119_97 and C235_119_101 survived 9k+ at 110M.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#482 |
|
Jun 2012
11·281 Posts |
C197_118_105 has survived 8000+ curves @B1=11e7 with no factors found.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#483 | |
|
Aug 2005
Seattle, WA
2×883 Posts |
Quote:
Code:
11+4,239 11+5,239 11+7,239 11+8,239 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#484 |
|
Sep 2009
977 Posts |
I have just queued C206_119_97.
C235_119_101 is borderline for 14e. The sextic's coefficients are fantastically large (c6: 10510100501, c0: 23863536599), so I haven't even test-sieved that, and I went with the quintic of more reasonable coefficients Code:
n: 2589310456899832928933301076778669578879120122369630480355405997172253313910033528160466408537532221128911504403237712622758278562537906325833003635581785560347127735770567490072987128252367045976109835671185970738159965132020094283971 deg: 5 c5: 119 c0: 104060401 Y1: 12571630183484301672314008717756984377273532301 Y0: -324294234694341316421188266002423799213601 type: snfs skew: 15.4293527015567 rlim: 134217727 alim: 134217727 lpbr: 31 lpba: 31 mfbr: 62 mfba: 62 rlambda: 2.6 alambda: 2.6 I'll preprocess C197_118_105 and the 4 HCN later. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| System management notes | kriesel | kriesel | 7 | 2020-10-21 18:52 |
| Improving the queue management. | debrouxl | NFS@Home | 10 | 2018-05-06 21:05 |
| Script-based Primenet assignment management | ewmayer | Software | 3 | 2017-05-25 04:02 |
| Do normal adults give themselves an allowance? (...to fast or not to fast - there is no question!) | jasong | jasong | 35 | 2016-12-11 00:57 |
| Power Management settings | PrimeCroat | Hardware | 3 | 2004-02-17 19:11 |