What's Happening

[R.D. Silverman]

We haven't heard anynews in a long time. What's happening
vis-a-vis 7,319+ and 7,304+?????

[bdodson]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

We haven't heard anynews in a long time. What's happening
vis-a-vis 7,319+ and 7,304+?????

The matrix for 319+ took two weeks, but we lost both the dependencies
and the checkpoint file. We're re-running. The other one hasn't been
started yet (and we're no longer distributing files with the linesiever).
-bd (with aplogies to Richard and Greg for my presumption(s))

[bdodson]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

We haven't heard anynews in a long time. What's happening
vis-a-vis 7,319+ and 7,304+?????

Greg reported 7,319+ C224 = p70*p154. Richard seems to
have been working on 7, 304+ C244 for some time. For my part,
I expect to contribute a good chunk of sieving (on 304+).

For other current bdodson@lehigh projects, sieving for
5, 398+ C274, with Greg's new binary of the 16e siever,
is reduced to the last few 100 tasks, and should finish today
with 400M+ unique relations. Sieving on the Batalov+Dodson
number 10, 393+ C253 started earlier this morning.

Tom reports that 12+256 C228 had a final count of
433466098 unique, for a monstrous 24.5M^2 matrix that's
now past 40%. -Bruce

PS - Sam's page 111 just finished (with the 319+ factorization),
and the Wanted lists have been updated to include the
Dodson/ECMNET cofactors C149 and C153 as Smaller-but-Needed
from page 111. Both numbers are reserved.

[bdodson]

Originally Posted by bdodson

Greg reported 7,319+ C224 = p70*p154. Richard seems to
have been working on 7, 304+ C244 for some time. For my part,
I expect to contribute a good chunk of sieving (on 304+).
-Bruce

Looks like sieving for 7, 304+ C244 may finish soon; we're reserving
10,269- c233, a Most wanted first hole, and also a repunit,
(10^269-1)/9 = 111...111 (269 ones). Several factors are already
known, but this is snfs, with difficulty 268. -Bruce

[Batalov]

Difficulty will be 270 with the upped sextic, right?
(insert :splitting hairs: smilie)

Incidentally, only recently I mentally fixed my own similar math error, the c268 2,2086M has difficulty 269.1 (and "could have been" a c270, but the algebraic 2,14L factor eats up two digits)

[bdodson]

Originally Posted by Batalov

Difficulty will be 270 with the upped sextic, right?
(insert :splitting hairs: smilie)

Incidentally, only recently I mentally fixed my own similar math error, the c268 2,2086M has difficulty 269.1 (and "could have been" a c270, but the algebraic 2,14L factor eats up two digits)

Looks like I mis-remembered and/or recorded from

233     10      269     -       269     0.866171
243     10      268     +       268     0.906716

both of which were on my to-do list (not necessarily by
me; making sure plausible targets were sufficiently ecm'd).
If you're saying that you've updated the entry in your table
to 270, guess that means sieving will be a bit more difficult;
not enough to worry about though. -Bruce

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by bdodson

Looks like sieving for 7, 304+ C244 may finish soon; we're reserving
10,269- c233, a Most wanted first hole, and also a repunit,
(10^269-1)/9 = 111...111 (269 ones). Several factors are already
known, but this is snfs, with difficulty 268. -Bruce

What's the status of 7,304+??? It seems to be taking forever.

Has NFSNET been put out of business by NFS@HOME?

10,269- is difficult..... Good luck.

[frmky]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

What's the status of 7,304+??? It seems to be taking forever.

A 14.5M square matrix was created, and the LA is about 20% done on my slow computer. At the current rate, it's got about 2.5 months left.

Greg

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by frmky

A 14.5M square matrix was created, and the LA is about 20% done on my slow computer. At the current rate, it's got about 2.5 months left.

Greg

The Wiki page still lists it as being sieved....

Which is one reason why NFSNET is fading away..... It provides
no feedback to participants.

[Wacky]

It has no participants because it has no lattice siever code which can operate within its control structure. It is not worthwhile even attempting to use the CWI line siever any more. It is far too inefficient for the class of numbers that we have been processing.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by Wacky

It has no participants because it has no lattice siever code which can operate within its control structure. It is not worthwhile even attempting to use the CWI line siever any more. It is far too inefficient for the class of numbers that we have been processing.

I can provide lattice siever code. GGNFS is available......
You once used my (line) siever code before switching to CWI.

Allow me to ask: how will you do 10,269- without participants?
This number is quite difficult.