![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Jan 2005
Minsk, Belarus
24×52 Posts |
![]()
Some ECM pre-factoring is necessary to remove small factors before running an SNFS job, stopping when the expected factor size is about 22% of SNFS difficulty.
There we collect targets which are ready for SNFS. If you see a composite which survived enough ECM tests and has a small cofactor, feel free to add it there. A polynomial construction is also appreciable :-) Last fiddled with by XYYXF on 2016-02-14 at 19:39 Reason: updated |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
(loop (#_fork))
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England
2·7·461 Posts |
![]()
I'd expect these to take 15k - 25k thread-hours each (depending on the age of the machine you use), so they're non-trivial commitments unless you've got access to a cluster.
Last fiddled with by XYYXF on 2015-06-21 at 17:47 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Jan 2005
Minsk, Belarus
24×52 Posts |
![]()
C251_126_103, 20000 curves at B1 = 260M
Sextic (difficulty 254): 126*(12617)6 + (10321)6 = 635 * C251 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Jan 2005
Minsk, Belarus
24·52 Posts |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
(loop (#_fork))
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England
11001001101102 Posts |
![]()
I'll take C208_133_43
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Jan 2005
Minsk, Belarus
24·52 Posts |
![]()
(reserved) C162_123_58, 7600 curves at B1=43M
Sextic (difficulty 217): 195112*(5820)6 + 228886641*(1239)6 = 50002164960288875248029920622180294596898636638194696301 * C162 C162_144_37, 7600 curves at B1=43M, perhaps needs some curves at B1=110M Sextic (difficulty 226): (3724)6 + 144*(1212)6 = 18503369959822517532081459390273377279584717590723349144530544225 * C162 These two are currently the smallest composites in the project (except for C160_146_39 which is already under SNFS by Sean Wellman). (reserved) C166_117_76, 7600 curves at B1=43M Sextic (difficulty 220): 438976*(7619)6 + 257049*(325*1312)6 = 3687149743256520163799275205528985260542672222364271457 * C166 Last fiddled with by XYYXF on 2015-06-28 at 06:59 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
(loop (#_fork))
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England
2×7×461 Posts |
![]()
I'll take C162_123_58; however, it is definitely a GNFS number (polynomial from five minutes search sieves 60% faster than the SNFS sextic).
The other C162 is an SNFS number, since the coefficients of the SNFS polynomial are so much smaller than for 123_58 Last fiddled with by fivemack on 2015-06-22 at 15:26 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Jan 2005
Minsk, Belarus
24×52 Posts |
![]()
That's how the coefficients affect the sieving speed :)
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Jan 2005
Minsk, Belarus
1100100002 Posts |
![]()
C165_125_71, 18000 curves at B1=110M
Sextic (difficulty 234): (7121)6 + 8875*(535)6 = 705802046969421619725838846919055406138655378181220926249900100315924 * C165 Might be GNFS as well... |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
(loop (#_fork))
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England
11001001101102 Posts |
![]()
I will throw 100 CPU-hours at polynomial selection and report back if it gets good enough, but at the moment I suspect 125,71 is SNFS.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
(loop (#_fork))
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England
2·7·461 Posts |
![]()
I'll take C165_125_71 for GNFS
Last fiddled with by fivemack on 2015-06-30 at 10:04 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ready GNFS targets | XYYXF | XYYXF Project | 87 | 2022-04-27 10:59 |
C321_149_146: Ready for SNFS | swellman | XYYXF Project | 21 | 2018-03-05 03:54 |
GNFS targets which need more ECM | XYYXF | XYYXF Project | 295 | 2017-10-27 12:38 |
SNFS targets which need more ECM | XYYXF | XYYXF Project | 57 | 2017-07-04 19:15 |
Getting ready for news | only_human | Lounge | 4 | 2004-05-16 23:36 |