Reserved for MF - Sequence 3408 - Page 34

LaurV · 2016-10-15, 05:19

yeah, and the graphic looks like it is taking off...

EdH · 2016-10-15, 14:37

And, this c193 doesn't look like anything I could factor easily, either.

I have gotten this far:

Code:

  100 curves with B1 =   3.0e6
  100 curves with B1 =  11.0e6
  100 curves with B1 =  43.0e6
 2950 curves with B1 = 110.0e6

EdH · 2016-10-17, 01:52

I was doing some rewriting of some of my scripts because I noticed the output of the current ecm.py was different from the previous version I was using. Look what I missed (for over a day) until now:

Code:

Sat 2016/10/15 21:19:39 UTC Input number is 1078463040366178656513252069998372090413256075931238262978888504124259070814620248149829075144468079639889184988709479197684315697845414761896628106730638913843128410641236087479218230479393449 (193 digits)
Sat 2016/10/15 21:19:39 UTC Run 8 out of 20:
Sat 2016/10/15 21:19:39 UTC Using B1=110000000, B2=776278396540, polynomial Dickson(30), sigma=1:395501120
Sat 2016/10/15 21:19:39 UTC Step 1 took 424103ms
Sat 2016/10/15 21:19:39 UTC Step 2 took 166986ms
Sat 2016/10/15 21:19:39 UTC ********** Factor found in step 2: 32527652508015991688135353490624137200476491466810293
Sat 2016/10/15 21:19:39 UTC Found prime factor of 53 digits: 32527652508015991688135353490624137200476491466810293
Sat 2016/10/15 21:19:39 UTC Prime cofactor 33155268124572048438133784781669020585809197372591704083430677812985365877497549554655661184724402184424723745171751999724006991866553283493 has 140 digits

schickel · 2016-10-17, 04:03

Ooh, nice catch!

unconnected · 2016-10-22, 20:40

Next blocker is c191, I've completed ECM up to t45 and 1000@43e6 on it.

EdH · 2016-10-22, 20:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by unconnected

Next blocker is c191, I've completed ECM up to t45 and 1000@43e6 on it.

I've currently got this much on it, as well:

Code:

  240 @ 2e3
  370 @ 11e3
  749 @ 5e4
  214 @ 25e4
  120 @ 1e6
  200 @ 3e6
  100 @ 11e6
  100 @ 43e6
4620 @ 11e7
1680 @ 85e7

EdH · 2016-10-23, 00:52

With unconnected and mine, are we about at t55?

Are we looking at needing t60?

If the above, are we close enough to send for a poly yet?

VBCurtis · 2016-10-23, 01:18

Yes, I believe you're at roughly a t55. Using the old rule of thumb 0.31*size = t58 = 50% of a t60 = 3 * t55 is enough for GNFS 191, but the Bayesian tool should ask for quite a bit less.

Perhaps another 1000-1500 at 85e7 and call it good?

I can start poly select Tuesday, but I only have a few GPU-days free. A c191 deserves something like a GPU-month, feasible among the 3-5 likely forum folks who do poly select.

If you do a poly select run, please post your ranges/parameters searched; I reduce stage 1 norm far enough that msieve does NOT search just a slice, so I am likely to overlap work others do. Since a few folks like to search tiny A1, I'll start at 5M to reduce the chance of overlap.

EdH · 2016-10-23, 03:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by VBCurtis

Yes, I believe you're at roughly a t55. Using the old rule of thumb 0.31*size = t58 = 50% of a t60 = 3 * t55 is enough for GNFS 191, but the Bayesian tool should ask for quite a bit less.

Perhaps another 1000-1500 at 85e7 and call it good?

Actually, it wants:

Code:

 4200 curves with B1 = 850.0e6
 4500 curves with B1 =   2.9e9

That will take a while to run, but I didn't know the comparison to your estimate for a poly, which is why I asked.

Quote:

Originally Posted by VBCurtis

I can start poly select Tuesday, but I only have a few GPU-days free. A c191 deserves something like a GPU-month, feasible among the 3-5 likely forum folks who do poly select.

If you do a poly select run, please post your ranges/parameters searched; I reduce stage 1 norm far enough that msieve does NOT search just a slice, so I am likely to overlap work others do. Since a few folks like to search tiny A1, I'll start at 5M to reduce the chance of overlap.

This one looks like a true team effort. We might be over my head considerably and I'm not that short...

VBCurtis · 2016-10-23, 04:48

I'll contribute 500 @ 85e7 this week, and I'll wait until you're doing the 3e9 curves before starting poly select. You're not yet halfway through ECM, by either the old rule of thumb or the new tool (interesting the new tool asks for so much ECM!).

EdH · 2016-10-23, 12:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by VBCurtis

I'll contribute 500 @ 85e7 this week, and I'll wait until you're doing the 3e9 curves before starting poly select. You're not yet halfway through ECM, by either the old rule of thumb or the new tool (interesting the new tool asks for so much ECM!).

Thanks! It doesn't suggest much in the low end though:

Code:

  100 curves with B1 =   3.0e6
  100 curves with B1 =  11.0e6
  100 curves with B1 =  43.0e6
 4500 curves with B1 = 110.0e6
 4200 curves with B1 = 850.0e6
 4500 curves with B1 =   2.9e9

2016-10-15, 14:37	#365
EdH "Ed Hall" Dec 2009 Adirondack Mtns 2²×3×5×59 Posts	And, this c193 doesn't look like anything I could factor easily, either. I have gotten this far: Code: 100 curves with B1 = 3.0e6 100 curves with B1 = 11.0e6 100 curves with B1 = 43.0e6 2950 curves with B1 = 110.0e6

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Reserved for MF - Sequence 4788	schickel	Aliquot Sequences	2934	2021-01-07 18:52
Reserved for MF - Sequence 3366	RichD	Aliquot Sequences	463	2021-01-02 16:01
Reserved for MF - Sequence 276	kar_bon	Aliquot Sequences	127	2020-12-17 10:05
Team Sieve #37: 3408:i1287	RichD	Aliquot Sequences	14	2013-08-02 17:02
80M to 64 bits ... but not really reserved	petrw1	Lone Mersenne Hunters	82	2010-01-11 01:57

2016-10-15, 05:19	#364
LaurV Romulan Interpreter Jun 2011 Thailand 3×3,049 Posts	yeah, and the graphic looks like it is taking off...

2016-10-17, 04:03	#367
schickel "Frank <^>" Dec 2004 CDP Janesville 2122₁₀ Posts	Ooh, nice catch!

2016-10-22, 20:40	#368
unconnected May 2009 Russia, Moscow 2529₁₀ Posts	Next blocker is c191, I've completed ECM up to t45 and 1000@43e6 on it.

2016-10-23, 00:52	#370
EdH "Ed Hall" Dec 2009 Adirondack Mtns 3540₁₀ Posts	With unconnected and mine, are we about at t55? Are we looking at needing t60? If the above, are we close enough to send for a poly yet?

2016-10-23, 01:18	#371
VBCurtis "Curtis" Feb 2005 Riverside, CA 11·419 Posts	Yes, I believe you're at roughly a t55. Using the old rule of thumb 0.31size = t58 = 50% of a t60 = 3 t55 is enough for GNFS 191, but the Bayesian tool should ask for quite a bit less. Perhaps another 1000-1500 at 85e7 and call it good? I can start poly select Tuesday, but I only have a few GPU-days free. A c191 deserves something like a GPU-month, feasible among the 3-5 likely forum folks who do poly select. If you do a poly select run, please post your ranges/parameters searched; I reduce stage 1 norm far enough that msieve does NOT search just a slice, so I am likely to overlap work others do. Since a few folks like to search tiny A1, I'll start at 5M to reduce the chance of overlap.

2016-10-23, 04:48	#373
VBCurtis "Curtis" Feb 2005 Riverside, CA 4609₁₀ Posts	I'll contribute 500 @ 85e7 this week, and I'll wait until you're doing the 3e9 curves before starting poly select. You're not yet halfway through ECM, by either the old rule of thumb or the new tool (interesting the new tool asks for so much ECM!).