mersenneforum.org What should the "q" value increase to for GNFS/SNFS computations?
 User Name Remember Me? Password
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2016-12-10, 07:01 #1 2147483647   Dec 2016 100102 Posts What should the "q" value increase to for GNFS/SNFS computations? Yesterday I started a large SNFS and I'm just wondering how long it's going to take. I just did a C100 with SNFS and the sieving range was 510k to 590k. What should the range look like for larger numbers, in increments of 10 digits? Will the range be larger for GNFS?
 2016-12-10, 07:50 #2 Batalov     "Serge" Mar 2008 Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2 11·19·47 Posts The script will take care of everything. q values should not concern you; they will be variable for different runs and will depend on the project's complexity. Different sievers will be chosen by the script, too; their rate of sieving might seem sometimes logical to the untrained eye and sometimes unexpectedly slower (on the next project) - but you should trust the script. Here are the fairly good rules of thumb: - for SNFS, with every 9 additional digits of SNFS difficulty, the overall runtime will double (or, which is the same, runtime will be 10x for every 30 digits) - for GNFS, with every 5 additional digits of length(N), the overall runtime will double Remember just these two and you will be in good shape. Examples: a 120-digit SNFS complexity project might take 1 core-hour on your computer. Then you can assume that a 150-digit SNFS complexity project will take 10 hours, a 180-digit SNFS complexity project will take 100 hours, and a 210-digit SNFS complexity project will take 1000 hours (~40 core-days). Ok? You can estimate how hard a GNFS project will be by taking length of the input number N, and converting to (N-30)*1.8 = similarly hard SNFS complexity. For example, a 130-digit GNFS is approximately as hard as a 180-SNFS-digit difficulty SNFS (from the estimate above, ~100 core-hours).
2016-12-10, 08:42   #3
2147483647

Dec 2016

2·32 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Batalov Here are the fairly good rules of thumb: - for SNFS, with every 9 additional digits of SNFS difficulty, the overall runtime will double (or, which is the same, runtime will be 10x for every 30 digits) - for GNFS, with every 5 additional digits of length(N), the overall runtime will double Remember just these two and you will be in good shape.
Interesting, thanks. I suppose these will actually over-estimate the time for large enough numbers since the complexity of NFS is sub-exponential, but if it's a good approximation then that's fine.

I did a C165 SNFS in ~5h30m yesterday and the one I'm currently doing is a C201, so ~16 times longer = about 3 days 16 hours. That's quite a lot less than I was expecting actually.

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Chair Zhuang Miscellaneous Math 21 2018-03-26 22:33 MooMoo2 Other Chess Games 5 2016-10-22 01:55 wildrabbitt Miscellaneous Math 11 2015-03-06 08:17 nitai1999 Software 7 2004-08-26 18:12

All times are UTC. The time now is 10:40.

Sun May 22 10:40:08 UTC 2022 up 38 days, 8:41, 0 users, load averages: 1.05, 1.24, 1.15

Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎𝜍 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔