20050118, 13:59  #1 
Aug 2002
Termonfeckin, IE
3^{2}·307 Posts 
10+ table
Code:
Size Base Index Mod Diff Ratio 242 10 323 + 323 0.749 295 10 332 + 332 0.888 300 10 346 + 346 0.867 318 10 347 + 347 0.916 300 10 353 + 353 0.849 292 10 356 + 356 0.82 332 10 358 + 358 0.927 329 10 359 + 359 0.916 289 10 365 + 292 0.989 /5q 283 10 373 + 373 0.758 305 10 374 + 340 0.897 /11 292 10 377 + 348 0.839 /13 278 10 379 + 379 0.733 324 10 382 + 382 0.848 366 10 383 + 383 0.955 348 10 386 + 386 0.901 265 10 392 + 336 0.788 /7 335 10 398 + 398 0.841 306 10 400 + 320 0.956 /5q 265 10 670L 231 10 710L 212 10 710M Last fiddled with by Batalov on 20210106 at 01:24 Reason: 10,371+ is done! 
20060824, 05:21  #2  
Jun 2005
lehigh.edu
400_{16} Posts 
p67 factor (not snfs ...)
Quote:
at 67digits, p67 = 4444349792156709907895752551798631908946180608768737946280238078881 Ooops, guess not! Lucky curve had sigma = 834412411, and the curve order is again waysmooth at [ <2, 2>, <3, 1>, <131, 1>, <124847, 1>, <1244459, 1>, <1785599, 1>, <3000931, 1>, <4032877, 1>, <27225659, 1>, <29985143, 1>, <87373729, 1>, <11805290281, 1> ] So B1=260M wasn't used so much (B1=87.4M would have done), and the large factor is under 200*(2nd largest); i.e., large step2 wasn't much used either. A new record 16months of hard searching since the previous (p66) record. Bruce 

20060824, 09:49  #3  
Nov 2003
2^{2}·5·373 Posts 
Quote:


20060824, 23:41  #4 
"Nancy"
Aug 2002
Alexandria
100110100011_{2} Posts 
Woohoo!! Bruce stikes again!
It was about time we saw an ECM p60+ this year. What took you so long? Thanks Bruce! Alex Edit: This warrants a Last fiddled with by akruppa on 20060824 at 23:42 
20061104, 11:29  #5 
"Sander"
Oct 2002
52.345322,5.52471
29·41 Posts 
Finally, after lots of problems, i managed to finish the factorization of 10,372+
Code:
N=27631128541915805055082181453641534739220599640437919826011911720853571851003653210276038758402805108684942992674414184678333002887846210747417 ( 143 digits) Divisors found: r1=23140616853203983900922551785166946660605063239337678349130406077337 (pp68) r2=1194053240550935343606131291791034479414833114386116350011658511441777011841 (pp76) 
20061109, 03:13  #6 
Mar 2003
New Zealand
13×89 Posts 

20061109, 14:25  #7  
"Sander"
Oct 2002
52.345322,5.52471
29×41 Posts 
Quote:
Someone form the GGNFS mailing list sent me a few programs to remove singletons. This apparently decreased memory usage so i was able to build the matrix. I lost a week of matrix solving time because someone rebooted the server matsolve was running on. When the matrix finally finished, sqrt produced trivial factorizations (with errors in screen output) on all dependencies. I was sent a new version of sqrt, but that didn't work either. I decided to reprocess the relations a second time, this time with a bit less relations (i had plenty the first time). After removing the singletons, the matrix build fine again. matsolve took another 12 days or so and this time the factors were found on the 9th!! dependency. 

20061109, 17:53  #8  
Nov 2003
2^{2}×5×373 Posts 
Quote:
Hi, Welcome to the woefull and wonderful wacky world of sieve postprocessing. We've all had our share of problems.... 

20061109, 20:20  #9  
"Sander"
Oct 2002
52.345322,5.52471
10010100101_{2} Posts 
Quote:
Although it was the first number that gave me problems with this release of GGNFS i'm hesitating to try another number from the cunningham list. It seems 140 150 digits is really pushing the limit. Are there any numbers left with a SNFS difficulty of around 200? 

20061110, 13:33  #10  
Nov 2003
2^{2}·5·373 Posts 
Quote:
by 3,5,7, or 11. e.g. 2,1630M, 11, 279+, 11,291+ (just over 200), 5, 411+, 5,429+, 6,369+, 2,1582L (just over 200) etc. etc. 

20061111, 11:12  #11  
"Sander"
Oct 2002
52.345322,5.52471
10010100101_{2} Posts 
Quote:
I checked out a few of the with Alex's phi.exe (Is there a version that can handle the +1 side?). This is new teritory to me so i've got a few questions: Is deg. 4 poly suitable for numbers this size (SNFS dif. ~200)? How much harder is a deg.4 compared to a deg. 5 poly? What would be a suitable factor base? 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
5+ table  garo  Cunningham Tables  100  20210104 22:36 
7+ table  garo  Cunningham Tables  86  20210104 22:35 
6+ table  garo  Cunningham Tables  80  20210104 22:33 
5 table  garo  Cunningham Tables  82  20200315 21:47 
6 table  garo  Cunningham Tables  41  20160804 04:24 