Here's the June update on the sequences under 1M:

- Two terminations (752976 and 877240) and one merge (659160)
- 3203 sequences extended, out of 9261 open
- 90500 total terms added
- Biggest gain in digits was 389064, which went from 108 to 145
- Biggest gain in terms was 862608, which added 2280 lines

[QUOTE=Raman;263046][URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&eff=2&aq=1111110&action=last20&fr=0&to=100"]1111110[/URL] terminates exactly in 1483
[/QUOTE]

1111110.i0 merges with [url=http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&eff=2&aq=914106&action=range&fr=0&to=10]914106.i3[/url].

It's almost useless to pick some sequences randomly above 1000000.
If it's open ended, there could exist a sequence lower than that merging with it like the above.

A seq. like 3*2^171 (= startvalue 8979466059761067529443439612208842872766049544044544 with 52 digits) has a minimum at index 80 with 49 digits -> lower than startvalue.
So this seq. merges with that one and perhaps quite lower with another one.

All open sequences < 1000000 are known and it would be better to concentrate on those first.
Higher ranges should be checked intensively for merges because this was not done before.

PS: What in heavens name is that attachment for?

I've been surveying all the open sequences regularly and finally spotted this:[code]969624 616. sz 116 2^9 * 3^3 * 11 * 31 * 397[/code] [SIZE="1"](I'm assuming someone's DB workers developed this.)[/SIZE]

I decided to run this to see where it went. From capture to escape, not very far as it turned out:[code] 597 . c108 = 2^5 * 3^2 * 5 * 13
598 . c108 = 2^9 * 3^2 * 5 * 11 * 13 * 31[/code][code] 627 . c120 = 2^9 * 3^4 * 5 * 11^2 * 19 * 31
628 . c121 = 2^10 * 3^3 * 5^2 * 11^2 * 19 * 31[/code]Nice growth: 12 digits in <30 lines.....

Here's the July update on sequences under 1M:

- Three terminations (306912, 368712, 477750) and two merges (532530, 671916)
- 3160 sequences extended, out of 9256 open
- 104500 total terms added
- Biggest gain in digits was 592944 (34 digits, from 106 to 140)
- Biggest gain in terms was 532530, which added 5599 lines
- 928 sequences under 110 digits

In related news, my Aliquot workers finished all the c105s in open unreserved sequences last week, and are about a third of the way through the c106s.

I've posted an updated list of all open sequences <1M [URL="ftp://ftp.frontiernet.net/pub/users/aliquot/public_ftp/AllSeq.zip"]here[/URL] (sorted by driver/guide).

Also, I will post a complete status update on the reserved sequences sometime soon (this weekend or mid-next week, depending on my schedule).

707778 is currently at i447, size 131, it has mutated to 2*3²*7 a few iterations ago. I will keep it for a few more relations to see whether it escapes the 2*3 driver.

[QUOTE=schickel;269208]I've posted an updated list of all open sequences <1M [URL="ftp://ftp.frontiernet.net/pub/users/aliquot/public_ftp/AllSeq.zip"]here[/URL] (sorted by driver/guide).

Also, I will post a complete status update on the reserved sequences sometime soon (this weekend or mid-next week, depending on my schedule).[/QUOTE]
Looking at this makes me think it might be fun to renew the driver escape special projects. I will look at this tomorrow. Where will I need to check for reservations elsewhere? The main reservation thread and if i<400?

Here's the August update on sequences under 1M (a little belated -- this is as of 8/17)

- Two terminations (585600 and 673140)
- 4818 sequences extended, out of 9254 open
- 105700 total terms added
- Biggest gain in digits was 393584 (30 digits, frmo 114 to 144)
- Biggest gain in terms was 856200 (added 3882 terms)

I pulled another complete status update. It's available [URL="ftp://ftp.frontiernet.net/public_ftp/AllSeq.zip"]here[/URL]. Best news from this one:[code]933436 8783. sz 110 2 * 53[/code]That's right: the longest single open sequence has captured the [COLOR="Green"]downdriver[/COLOR]!

Let's hope it does something exciting!!!! Good luck [B]unconnected[/B]!

[QUOTE=schickel;270288]Let's hope it does something exciting!!!! Good luck [B]unconnected[/B]![/QUOTE]

And it did! Will post status update soon.

The time is now. I've just uploaded [URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=933436&action=last20"]933436[/URL] into FactorDB.

[URL="http://factordb.com/aliquot.php?type=1&aq=933436&big=1"]Graph[/URL]

:party:

[QUOTE=unconnected;270484]The time is now. I've just uploaded [URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=933436&action=last20"]933436[/URL] into FactorDB.

[URL="http://factordb.com/aliquot.php?type=1&aq=933436&big=1"]Graph[/URL]

:party:[/QUOTE]

12000 lines! :surprised

:bounce wave::bow wave::bounce wave::bow wave::bounce wave:

Looks like the AllSeq file will need an extra column for the fifth digit :razz:

[QUOTE=unconnected;270484]The time is now. I've just uploaded [URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=933436&action=last20"]933436[/URL] into FactorDB.

[URL="http://factordb.com/aliquot.php?type=1&aq=933436&big=1"]Graph[/URL]
[/QUOTE]
Egad!! What a monster!
Congratulations!

[QUOTE=unconnected;270484]The time is now. I've just uploaded [URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=933436&action=last20"]933436[/URL] into FactorDB.

[URL="http://factordb.com/aliquot.php?type=1&aq=933436&big=1"]Graph[/URL]

:party:[/QUOTE]Ah, I was wondering. It seemed like you were just ignoring it....and that was driving me crazy.[QUOTE=10metreh;270485]12000 lines! :surprised[/quote]And here I would have been happy with just another 1000! (It even leaves the 314718 component of 4788 in the dust!)

It's a shame it didn't drop a little bit lower and catch a merge; that would have been spectacular.[quote]Looks like the AllSeq file will need an extra column for the fifth digit :razz:[/QUOTE]Easy enough fix......let's hope another sequence will eventually join the ranks of the 10k+!
[QUOTE=Batalov;270488]Egad!! What a monster!
Congratulations![/QUOTE]Agreed. Thanks for the work on this!

Now we just have to pray for the driver to break....

A bit of trivia: it had ridden 57 (!) downdrivers so far...

I updated the status of all the reserved seqeunces. Current downdriver count: 3.

Oh, and we had a sequence exceed 12k lines! :w00t:

I posted an updated status on everything [URL="ftp://ftp.frontiernet.net/pub/users/aliquot/AllSeq.zip"]here[/URL]. I expanded the length column by one to accomodate our outstanding sequence.....hopefully it will not remain alone too long.

seq 245274:i1344 no guide : 2^7*1993

this sequence is driving me crazy : it when by almost every driver/guide possible

Lucky sigma on 933436:i12320 c133:
Using B1=11000000, B2=35133391030, polynomial Dickson(12), sigma=536664592
Step 1 took 139769ms
Step 2 took 113488ms
********** Factor found in step 2: 49434555152210623070275042603792918064864307388157
Found probable prime factor of 50 digits: 49434555152210623070275042603792918064864307388157
Probable prime cofactor 45080758411078613700787098578757792041003795627193343051886547447593279362517899183 has 83 digits

The sequence reach 150 digits now :w00t:

From 572000:[code] 3070 . c151 = 2^9 * 3 * 11 * 31^2 * 200516578187 * 6498677639521 * 235522099140954933791797272034310263233839812525626526027579455041373991238392347043872807621631035675122200440157671137
3071 . c151 = 2^8 * 3 * 11 * 31^2 * 282322968457279 * 524369733597234122500935493 * 8304993662879383735422919815522414663384496927267758400531840909967945502579220520492221524245592400147[/code]I might run it another couple of lines to see where the 2 settles down to.....

Just playing around, I got this to happen with ECM work by the DB (from 356272):[code]1167 . c114 = 2^4 * 3^2 * 5 * 31^2
1168 . c114 = 2^5 * 3^2 * 5 * 31[/code]If it were only that easy all time :cry:

[QUOTE=fivemack;271946]May I reserve 890960 and (probably very briefly) 281592?

398856 is currently at iteration 1152 with 2^4[/QUOTE]Looks like you had quite a ride!

Unfortunately, 2^2 * 7 has taken over....

While the rest of you were having [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=273164#post273164"]fun[/URL], I just spent ~ a week factoring this (604560):[code] 2687 . c152 = 2^5 * 8535929 * p57 * p87[/code]to get this:[code] 2688 . c152 = 2^4 * 31[/code]Arrrrrrgggggggghhhhhhhh! :max:

I ran into some trouble with my 996666. Successfully pushed it few steps more, till T903, even overpassed a difficult C111 at T899 (and an easy C111 at T902), but now I really have trouble. I have run into a C108 that nfs (yafu) can't factor (?!?!?!?). After almost two days of sieving it is keeping telling me that he wants to extend the ECM limit or something like this (?!?!?) afer every few hours of crunching. NFS was selected automatically by yafu, no idea why (the limit in the ini file is higher, because I prefer siqs, at least for that I know how many relations it needs, so I have an idea how much time is left) when I used aliqueit12. I have shut it down and started manual SIQS on it. Already about 10k relations from 196k needed, the progress is quite slow at this digit score.

If aliqueit12 have selected nfs for this number but your path to the gnfs-lasieve files is wrong aliqueit extend the ecm limit till the end of time or the factor is found.

Regards Andi_HB

thanks for reply, so, if I use -y switch to do all factorization with yafu, it means that yafu will not use the settings from yafu.ini? (which is supposed to launch siqs, and not nfs). Also, related to the path of ggnfs, that is right in yafu.ini, and yafu(nfs) works well, but this problem appears only from aliqueit. Is it a different syntax to specify the path in aliqueit.ini? like, does it matter if I use / or \ or else? Can I give spaces in the path name? Do I need to use quotes? I think I am missing something here...

Confused...

Is there any posibility to use aliqueit just for combining the factors to get the next term of the sequence, but to do ALL the factorization work with an external program that [U][B]I[/B][/U] specify, launched from aliqueit with the parameters that [U][B]I[/B][/U] want? (please remark the stressed I's).

Thanks a lot in advance.

Is it possible that you have a second copy of yafu.exe in your aliqueit folder? And that this one has a different yafu.ini (with a wrongly specified gnfs path)?

P.S.: Depending on your hardware, there is a crossover line at approx. 95-98 digits: Around this crossover (say when you are not much more than ~2-3 digits off) siqs and gnfs are almost equally fast; above this crossover gnfs is faster. For a c108, for siqs you see, how long it will take, but gnfs (which was chosen automatically) is quite a bit faster.

Thanks for your fast reply, I fully understand what you say. I have to dig more on it. For my computer, yafu's "tune()" sets the "crossover" around 100-105 digits, depending of what I am doing with the computer during "tune" is running. Because at 108 is not a big difference, I prefer to use siqs, because of the fact that siqs is telling me in the beginning how many relations it needs, as I said, so I can have an idea of how much time it needs more till finish, and I can see some progress ("found xxx relations from yyy needed", and xxx is raising). For nfs I have no idea when (and if) it will finish. That is why I manually edited yafu.ini and played with the values, set the crossover higher. When I run yafu independently, it works. When it runs from aliquot program, it is quite arbitrarily, and this is frustrating, for example the C111 was factored with [B]siqs[/B] launched from yafu launched by aliqueit (who automatically selected siqs!), but sometimes, no idea what criteria he uses, he launches nfs. I believe that the selection is done by yafu, and the aliqueit just launches "yafu factor(xxxx)". I would prefer to be able to customize aliqueit in such a way to specify when I want "yafu siqs()" and when I want "yafu nfs()", eventually with other options (-threads xx, -noecm, etc). Slowly I started to figure them out by playing with the ini files and reading the yafu sources (I can not compile them, using an old VS2005, but I can look into them). Are there any aliqueit12 sources available?

By the way, there is no yafu in aliquot folder. I have a folder called "work", and inside there are other 4 folders, yafu (with 1.28.5 inside), msieve (with 1.49 inside), aliquot (with aliqueit12 indide), ggnfs (with all the lasieveXXX.exe, etc). I don't use python, I have perl in a different folder (used for pari). How the aliqueit.ini should look? (specially the lines where paths are specified). Does it need the python stuff? I am starting aliqueit with -y switch. Theoretically, it should pass everything to yafu and go to sleep until yafu reports some factors. The documentation on aliqueit is scarce, I don't know why it needs all the stuff it needs, in the ini file.

[QUOTE=LaurV;273351]thanks for reply, so, if I use -y switch to do all factorization with yafu, it means that yafu will not use the settings from yafu.ini? (which is supposed to launch siqs, and not nfs). Also, related to the path of ggnfs, that is right in yafu.ini, and yafu(nfs) works well, but this problem appears only from aliqueit. Is it a different syntax to specify the path in aliqueit.ini? like, does it matter if I use / or \ or else? Can I give spaces in the path name? Do I need to use quotes? I think I am missing something here...

Confused...

Is there any posibility to use aliqueit just for combining the factors to get the next term of the sequence, but to do ALL the factorization work with an external program that [U][B]I[/B][/U] specify, launched from aliqueit with the parameters that [U][B]I[/B][/U] want? (please remark the stressed I's).

Thanks a lot in advance.[/QUOTE]
I have a GUI for running Aliqueit at [URL="http://www.starreloaders.com/edhall/AliWin/AliWin.html"]AliWin2 - A GUI by Edwin C. Hall for Aliqueit by Mikael Klasson[/URL] that you might be interested in looking over. The page goes into a full explanation of a working install of all the programs. Unfortunately, I've not had an opportunity to test this on a Windows 64-bit OS machine, yet. But, you might be able to catch a couple ideas from the page. The source is also provided. There is a [URL="http://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=13365"]thread about AliWin on this forum[/URL].

(I also have a page of [URL="http://www.starreloaders.com/edhall/AliWin/AliqueitLinstall.html"]Steps to install and set up Aliqueit on an Ubuntu computer[/URL] for linux users, but no GUI, yet.)

The AliWin2 page gives full instructions to achieve a working set of programs for running Aliqueit via AliWin2, but everything should still run manually, if desired.

To answer a few of your direct questions:

- For a Windows system, I have had to use \ instead of / in aliqueit.ini. (factmsieve.py still needs /)
- I always use full paths starting from C:\
- Quotes are a must if there are spaces within the path and optional otherwise.
- I have had trouble with Python distinguishing between c and C. (My ggnfs line has to have an upper case C.) I haven't run Perl. All my Windows paths now begin with upper case C:\...
- [URL="http://mklasson.com/aliqueit112.zip"]Aliqueit112.zip[/URL] from Mikael Klasson's page includes source files in the src folder.
- For all my setups I include YAFU and its ini in the aliqueit folder.

I hope at least some of this is helpful.

[QUOTE=LaurV;273365] Thanks for your fast reply, I fully understand what you say. I have to dig more on it. For my computer, yafu's "tune()" sets the "crossover" around 100-105 digits, depending of what I am doing with the computer during "tune" is running. Because at 108 is not a big difference, I prefer to use siqs, because of the fact that siqs is telling me in the beginning how many relations it needs, as I said, so I can have an idea of how much time it needs more till finish, and I can see some progress ("found xxx relations from yyy needed", and xxx is raising).
For nfs I have no idea when (and if) it will finish. That is why I manually edited yafu.ini and played with the values, set the crossover higher. When I run yafu independently, it works.
[/QUOTE]
As is frequently the case, I've probably mis-communicated the function of the crossover field in the tune_info lines of the yafu.ini file. The crossover is reported as a FYI value only - it is not used by the program to determine the point at which to switch to ggnfs. The crossover point is determined using the other values recorded in the tune_info lines, namely, the coefficients that determine the expected running time of each method (siqs,nfs) as a function of the digit size of the input. So playing with the crossover value would involve changing these coefficients (not recommended).

[QUOTE=LaurV;273365]
When it runs from aliquot program, it is quite arbitrarily, and this is frustrating, for example the C111 was factored with [B]siqs[/B] launched from yafu launched by aliqueit (who automatically selected siqs!), but sometimes, no idea what criteria he uses, he launches nfs. I believe that the selection is done by yafu, and the aliqueit just launches "yafu factor(xxxx)".
[/QUOTE]

Yeah, this should be what happens - when run with -y, aliqueit turns over control of to yafu's factor(), which will automatically determine the best way to proceed. The criteria is to minimize the expected time of a complete factorization given inputs predicting QS and NFS time as well as measurements of time spent doing other things like ECM. I don't know why a C111 would be chosen as optimal with siqs... I'd need to see the .ini file and the logfile to begin to understand that.

[QUOTE=LaurV;273365]
I would prefer to be able to customize aliqueit in such a way to specify when I want "yafu siqs()" and when I want "yafu nfs()", eventually with other options (-threads xx, -noecm, etc). Slowly I started to figure them out by playing with the ini files and reading the yafu sources (I can not compile them, using an old VS2005, but I can look into them). Are there any aliqueit12 sources available?
[/QUOTE]

Currently there is no way to specify a strict cutoff between siqs and nfs. It either happens automatically using tune_info entries or it happens at 95 digits with no tune_info entries. The aliqueit source is h[URL="https://sites.google.com/site/bbuhrow/home/aliquot-sequences/aliqueit112.zip?attredirects=0&d=1"]ere[/URL].

Thanks both for detailed help. I am looking right now into AliWin to see how I can make use of it.

@bb: I knew about the fact there is no way to specify a "hard" cutoff between nfs and siqs. I was talking about the possibility to specify [B]in aliqueit's[/B] ini file (or else) to [B]explicitly [/B]run "yafu siqs()" or "yafu nfs()" instead of "yafu factor()", and more generally, to be able to tell to aliqueit (or to other "wrapper" application like it) [B]what program to launch and [/B]with which parameters. Aliqueit is quite scarce on such feature, or not enough documented. There was no arguing about yafu, only about aliqueit. As you know, yafu is my preferred factoring toy. :smile:. Fast and neat. I fully understand how yafu works and I fully understood siqs algorithm, even did my own implementations for small numbers, to help myself understand what's going on. However, nfs algorithm is still slippery terrain for me. This is an additional reason why I prefer siqs, beside of what I explained before. We are generally afraid of things we don't fully understand :smile:

At long last the workers have finished all the c107s (4188 of them) on open sequences under 1M.

Now on to the c108s -- currently about 2600 to go, but of course there will be many more generated along the way.

From 660:[code] 890 . c181 = [COLOR="Red"]2^3 * 3^2 * 5[/COLOR] * [COLOR="Blue"]759492743757752077394167264747516318068472138837[/COLOR] * [COLOR="blue"]8577699773645811181373240691092327851472636312778873586096412527952983518022415774631214696619438304178458945171149397776984407487[/COLOR]
891 . c181 = [COLOR="red"]2^3 * 3^2 * 5 [/COLOR]* 149 * 92136793617291827118528192645303326285053567 * 1067720609074675907784135312004454076764365970682619148779619910073905157810431774214090863907675720930834522584769245460601147841503
892 . c182 = [COLOR="red"]2^3 * 3^2 * 5[/COLOR] * 31 * 59 * 21334548679760461 * 43469986346582693 * 751783956649954897933022237086010321 * 26113775754970230178461154432639855352846265143121917161867270820209283645793379460313545764882866347258143
[/code]Well, that didin't work out. Looks like someone cracked the c178, maybe ECM? The driver didin't break, though. It was at 890 on the last download.....

[URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=11040&action=last20"]11040[/URL] got the downdriver at height 152.

[QUOTE=unconnected;280963][URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=11040&action=last20"]11040[/URL] got the downdriver at height 152.[/QUOTE]
That's the second highest ever acquisition and the highest above 10^4. Congratulations!

Someone had quite a run with 81192, but I don't see it mentioned anywhere in the forum. From the worker logs:

updating 81192.1235 (was c112, d114, driver: 2^3 * 3): got 81192.3108, c51, d58, driver: 2^4 * 31

Now back up at 100 digits and 3800 terms, with 2^5 * 3. Anyone want to take credit?

[QUOTE=bchaffin;281200]Someone had quite a run with 81192, but I don't see it mentioned anywhere in the forum. From the worker logs:

updating 81192.1235 (was c112, d114, driver: 2^3 * 3): got 81192.3108, c51, d58, driver: 2^4 * 31

Now back up at 100 digits and 3800 terms, with 2^5 * 3. Anyone want to take credit?[/QUOTE]

None of my sequences end in that numbers (assuming some "involuntary" merges, as I am working some sequences with more than 6 digits start number). So, it is not me, for sure.

[QUOTE=bchaffin;281200]Someone had quite a run with 81192, but I don't see it mentioned anywhere in the forum. From the worker logs:

updating 81192.1235 (was c112, d114, driver: 2^3 * 3): got 81192.3108, c51, d58, driver: 2^4 * 31

Now back up at 100 digits and 3800 terms, with 2^5 * 3. Anyone want to take credit?[/QUOTE]

If it is not reserved, wouldn't your workers have picked it up when it dropped below C108 ?

Edit: I just watched it "automatically solve" a C84 and add 2 iterations. This is unlikely to be the work of an individual. It is probably either the DB workers or your workers.

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;281203]If it is not reserved, wouldn't your workers have picked it up when it dropped below C108 ?

Edit: I just watched it "automatically solve" a C84 and add 2 iterations. This is unlikely to be the work of an individual. It is probably either the DB workers or your workers.[/QUOTE]

Yes, they will (and did) -- but what I pasted above was the log from the workers. The sequence had been sitting there with a c112 for a long time, but I periodically re-check to see if anything has changed, and it had -- by nearly 2000 terms! After that the workers picked it up, but someone else was responsible for that first big push. Mystery contributors...

[QUOTE=bchaffin;281403]Yes, they will (and did) -- but what I pasted above was the log from the workers. The sequence had been sitting there with a c112 for a long time, but I periodically re-check to see if anything has changed, and it had -- by nearly 2000 terms! After that the workers picked it up, but someone else was responsible for that first big push. Mystery contributors...[/QUOTE]
I believe there are several of us running yoyo's script. Maybe someone had the right offset and randomness to catch the c112...

489762 is decreasing now at i1994 previous line was a C127 still working on the sequence my math says if it increases it's rate of decent exponentially using the last 2 as data to go off it would be 2 digits in 70 lines too bad for not following it seeming likely.

950436 picked up the downdriver at 143 digits:

[CODE] 3570 . 13631370361367105992743633812390105834462481943948427496562276872407758524885535448184120156276618084433263849226765745323728774613298859477824 = 2^6 * 212990161896361031136619278318595403663476280374194179633785576131371226951336491377876877441822157569269747644168214770683262103332794679341
3571 . 13418380199470744961607014534071510430799005663574233316928491296276387297934198956806243278834795926863994101582597530553045512509966064798610 = 2 * 5 * 31 * 157 * 28224071 * 646162246523029781073110169310148291 * 15117414154889457454520566892394663681100197331589155797043708897668197661110928245239193081803
[/CODE]

I think that's my highest acquisition ever. And to think, I was *this* close to giving up on it a couple days ago...

742740 progress report
 

Well, 742740 dropped a 3, but not any 5s. Does it belong to sub-project #11 again?

[code]
1215: sz139 2^3 * 3^3 * 5^2 * p55 * p80
1216: sz139 2^3 * 3 * 5^2 * 13 * 647 * 17989 * p15 * p17 * p97
1217: sz140 2^3 * 3 * 5^2 * c137
[/code]Although it stretches my resources, I'm still playing with this one...

Actually, I'm trying to devise and describe a method to use aliqueit on several machines at once on the same gnfs job. Look elsewhere for a new thread soon...

[QUOTE=EdH;281991]Well, 742740 dropped a 3, but not any 5s. Does it belong to sub-project #11 again?

[code]
1215: sz139 2^3 * [COLOR="Red"]3^3[/COLOR] * 5^2 * p55 * p80
1216: sz139 2^3 * 3 * 5^2 * 13 * 647 * 17989 * p15 * p17 * p97
1217: sz140 2^3 * 3 * 5^2 * c137
[/code]Although it stretches my resources, I'm still playing with this one...

Actually, I'm trying to devise and describe a method to use aliqueit on several machines at once on the same gnfs job. Look elsewhere for a new thread soon...[/QUOTE]Sorry, I blew it when I looked at that line. Dang it, I thought the 3 was 3^2. There was (and still is) a chance, but the exponent on the 3 is going to make it hard.

As far as sub-project 11, no it's not part of the project, since the 2^3 * 3 * 5 is one of the main drivers. Keep it up as long as you care to. It's got a [SIZE="1"]small[/SIZE] chance of escape, but in the meantime, it's gonna keep right on growing.

[URL="ftp://ftp.frontiernet.net/pub/users/aliquot/AllSeq.zip"]Here[/URL] is a freshly updated sequence list for everything. I left it sorted by driver/guide. Some highlights:[code]738144 1453. sz 131 2 * 163 * 7192601667461276770201281877
829332 1770. sz 104 2 * 37 * 59 * 179
4788 2765. sz 161 2 * 5
950436 3576. sz 142 2 * 5 * 25114913927 * 317977738389709
816792 1186. sz 118 2 * 5 * 53
11040 6506. sz 150 2 * 7 * 41 * 557 * 995989[/code][code]701220 992. sz 114 2^10 * 3 * 11 * 23
947208 1648. sz 120 2^10 * 3 * 11 * 23 * 433
589212 1036. sz 118 2^10 * 3 * 23 * 337
536904 1773. sz 123 2^10 * 3 * 5 * 7 * 13
414480 507. sz 114 2^10 * 3 * 61
552876 2040. sz 123 2^10 * 3^2 * 5^2 * 13 * 2377097
531024 2620. sz 115 2^10 * 3^3 * 11^2
622830 871. sz 116 2^10 * 3^3 * 7
609492 763. sz 115 2^11 * 3 * 419
820728 857. sz 114 2^11 * 3 * 5 * 11
583800 449. sz 119 2^12 * 3 * 7 * 673[/code][code] 966 893. sz 178 2^2 * 3^2 * 5 * 83 * 2099
162126 4283. sz 178 2^3 * 3 * 5 * 461
552 1057. sz 179 2^2 * 3 * 71 * 145633
8352 1737. sz 180 2^2 * 3 * 7^2 * 37 * 4597 * 10841336113
660 895. sz 183 2^3 * 3^2 * 5 * 3163 * 14159 * 32070039222359 * 81741146396847353333[/code]And last, but not least:[code]842592 8003. sz 172 2^3 * 3 * 5 * 13 * 587 * 823 * 1627
195528 8017. sz 144 2 * 3^4 * 24110979082363
552150 8197. sz 147 2^2 * 3 * 7^2 * 17 * 953 * 16493
453798 8565. sz 148 2^2 * 7
933436 12378. sz 160 2^2 * 5 * 7 * 29[/code]

Already a change for one:

[URL="http://www.factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&eff=2&aq=742740&action=last20&fr=0&to=100"]742740[/URL] has dropped one of the 5s. Within the last 20 lines, it has shed two 3s and two 5s. If it would just lose one more of each...:whistle:

my current sequence I've been doing for about 30 lines now and it's been without the 3 for 12 lines now ( and falling for the last 11) it appears. I'm currently working on line 2002 doing ggnfs on what I think is a c115 due to ecm going into auto increasing curve mode if I remember correctly.

PS: in the lines I have been doing it's had about 6 lines with the 3 and I think every line is C127 or above.

[QUOTE=EdH;282193]Already a change for one:

[URL="http://www.factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&eff=2&aq=742740&action=last20&fr=0&to=100"]742740[/URL] has dropped one of the 5s. Within the last 20 lines, it has shed two 3s and two 5s. If it would just lose one more of each...:whistle:[/QUOTE]
Ouch! One of the worst - read most persistent and fast increasing - drivers.... (2^3*(2^4-1))... If you can get rid of it, please let us know, I am yet to see how this driver can be broken... In fact, I am dying to see that, see my posts about 585000 in the reservation thread. Usually it holds for hundreds of terms....

Who said "Fear the 2^3*3*5" was damn right!

[QUOTE=LaurV;282363]Ouch! One of the worst - read most persistent and fast increasing - drivers.... (2^3*(2^4-1))... If you can get rid of it, please let us know, I am yet to see how this driver can be broken... In fact, I am dying to see that, see my posts about 585000 in the reservation thread. Usually it holds for hundreds of terms....

Who said "Fear the 2^3*3*5" was damn right![/QUOTE]
It proved too persistent! 2^3 * 3 * 5 has been steady for 15 lines. I let it go at 145/c132...

[QUOTE=LaurV;282363]Ouch! One of the worst - read most persistent and fast increasing - drivers.... (2^3*(2^4-1))... If you can get rid of it, please let us know, I am yet to see how this driver can be broken... In fact, I am dying to see that, see my posts about 585000 in the reservation thread. Usually it holds for hundreds of terms....

Who said "Fear the 2^3*3*5" was damn right![/QUOTE]
When I want to see how to lose a driver I look at small sequences in the database with the driver(2^3*3*5*7 works for 2^3*3*5). This can give a good idea how to lose it.

[QUOTE=henryzz;282613]When I want to see how to lose a driver I look at small sequences in the database with the driver(2^3*3*5*7 works for 2^3*3*5). This can give a good idea how to lose it.[/QUOTE]
7 had nothing to do here, it comes and goes every few terms, unless you manage to get 2^2, when 3 and 5 will come and go and 2^2*7 will stay. What I call "driver" is always a number of the form 2^n*(2^(n+1)-1), with 2^(n+1)-1 being prime or not. These are the most persistent, no mater if they are perfect numbers or not (they are perfect numbers when 2^(n+1)-1 is prime, therefore a mersenne prime). Like 2*3, 2^2*7, 2^3*3*5, 2^4*31, 2^6*127... 2^10*23*89... 2^12*8191... etc. And even from this list, some of them are missing, they are only guides, for example 2^5*3^2*7 (i.e. n=5), this is not very persistent due to the even power of 3. They are more and more persistent as n is higher, and they make the sequence grow faster and faster when n is smaller and very smooth composite.

I posted a complete status update over in the reservation thread.

[QUOTE=LaurV;282763]7 had nothing to do here[/QUOTE]

He meant, 2^3*3*5*7 (840) is an example of a sequence with the 2^3*3*5 driver. Examining that will help you see how the driver is lost ([url]http://www.factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&eff=2&aq=840&action=range&fr=0&to=21[/url])

Aaaa! Ok. Now I understand what he said. Sorry for being dumb. Of course I am doing the same, studying sequences with small start numbers. I did this repeatedly, usually adding *19*37 after the drivers, or some equivalent.

releasing 412944, i2621, size 138, 2^2*3*5*7*619944163* C127

you'll be happy to know I got aliquot back up and running off my old PC, now to get prime95 to not be copied as a short cut and I might be up and running working on a C104 in this current sequence.

I should probably test the machine first and 2 I forgot to get perl again.

[QUOTE=science_man_88;283795]you'll be happy to know I got aliquot back up and running off my old PC, now to get prime95 to not be copied as a short cut and I might be up and running working on a C104 in this current sequence.

I should probably test the machine first and 2 I forgot to get perl again.[/QUOTE]

I don't want to take everything away from slower machines but I now seem to have everything up and running.

And, just in time for the new year (in my time zone, anyway)... the elves have finished all the c108s in open unreserved sequences!

Happy new year, everyone!

The Aliquot workers reached a milestone over the weekend: half a million factorizations. When they started in early March 2010, the 'floor' of composites in open sequences was at 96 digits. Now it's at 109 digits -- and 110 for sequences under about 500K.

How many Aliquot terms that has added is hard to tell; terms which fall to whatever trial factoring the DB does aren't counted. But over the life of the workers, a total of a little over a million terms have been added in the ~9200 open sequences from all of us together. The workers have found about 19 terminations or merges.

In case anyone is curious, below are some stats on the number of factorizations for each digit size from 61 to 120 (the workers' ceiling). The number on the left of the / is how many have been factored; on the right is how many remain.

[CODE]Factored / to factor:
61: 2189 / 0 71: 3679 / 0 81: 7473 / 0 91: 14445 / 1 101: 19551 / 1 111: 1153 / 1661
62: 2214 / 0 72: 5303 / 0 82: 8158 / 0 92: 15193 / 0 102: 16944 / 0 112: 933 / 1358
63: 2342 / 0 73: 5092 / 0 83: 9039 / 0 93: 16050 / 0 103: 14167 / 1 113: 725 / 794
64: 2423 / 0 74: 6805 / 0 84: 9376 / 0 94: 16591 / 0 104: 12292 / 1 114: 471 / 502
65: 2588 / 0 75: 5193 / 0 85: 10052 / 0 95: 17111 / 0 105: 10911 / 2 115: 386 / 308
66: 2746 / 0 76: 5140 / 0 86: 10811 / 0 96: 17981 / 0 106: 9698 / 7 116: 226 / 193
67: 2882 / 0 77: 6335 / 0 87: 11523 / 0 97: 19602 / 0 107: 7719 / 5 117: 171 / 122
68: 3082 / 0 78: 6092 / 0 88: 12125 / 0 98: 19568 / 0 108: 6065 / 6 118: 145 / 88
69: 3286 / 0 79: 6483 / 0 89: 13177 / 0 99: 19977 / 0 109: 3292 / 1344 119: 1091 / 56
70: 3573 / 0 80: 6948 / 0 90: 13740 / 0 100: 19845 / 1 110: 1373 / 2283 120: 227 / 49
[/CODE]

Nice p51 factor from 11040:i9270 was found by YAFU.

[QUOTE]prp51 = 938764062701122795960213320690812944421623160496389 (curve 18 stg2 B1=10000000 sigma=1162538005 thread=3)[/QUOTE]

[URL="http://www.factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=794184&action=last20&fr=0&to=100"]794184[/URL]!

I've been ready to give it up several times, and every time I'm ready to release it, it drops the 3. But, every drop is only long enough to get me to go a couple digits more. Check out this last one, where I decided to go to 125 digits with >110 ECMed cofactor:
[code]
[COLOR=black]Checked 1724 126 (show) [/COLOR][COLOR=black]2612781567...00<126> = [/COLOR][COLOR=black]2^2 · [/COLOR][COLOR=black][COLOR=Red]3[/COLOR] · [/COLOR][COLOR=black]5^2 · [/COLOR][COLOR=black]181 · [/COLOR][COLOR=black]4811752425...39<121>
Unchecked 1725 126 (show) [/COLOR][COLOR=black]4988632445...40<126> = [/COLOR][COLOR=black]2^2 · [/COLOR][COLOR=black]5 · [/COLOR][COLOR=black]19 · [/COLOR][COLOR=black]71 · [/COLOR][COLOR=black]1621 · [/COLOR][COLOR=black]6373 · [/COLOR][COLOR=black]1789833482...51<115>[/COLOR][/code]

thanks for that last sequence schickel it's dropped to a C110.

[QUOTE=science_man_88;290291]thanks for that last sequence schickel [B]it has [/B] dropped to a C110 [B]so far[/B].[/QUOTE]

edits: in bold.

[QUOTE=science_man_88;290312]edits: in bold.[/QUOTE]

well that didn't last long ( time wise) I'm now about 200 lines from where I started and it has now climbed to about C120 caught with 2^2*3.

Conversely, [URL="http://www.factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=794184&action=last20&fr=0&to=100"]794184[/URL] has dropped the 5(s)... and is decreasing, ever so slowly, again...

OK, so it's only been a couple lines of 2^3 * 29...

The elves have finished all the c109s on open unreserved sequences under 1M.

(With the exception of a number of sequences which are currently broken in the DB, of course.)

finally it got the down driver took almost 300 lines but I got it. I don't know if I had it any time in between.

170766 almost made it dropping to 13 digits. It then went back up as it picked up 2^4*31. I have gotten it nearly to 120 digits now.

I don't think it would merge with 13 digits, but I haven't checked yet.

Its index is over 5000 now.

[URL]http://factorization.ath.cx/aliquot.php?type=1&aq=170766&big=1[/URL]

[QUOTE=science_man_88;291410]finally it got the down driver took almost 300 lines but I got it. I don't know if I had it any time in between.[/QUOTE]

I'm now above that 300 lines since starting and I still have that downdriver it looks like I'm currently dealing with a C114.

Christophe [URL="http://christophe.clavier.free.fr/Aliquot/site/Aliquot.html"]posted[/URL] this observation on Feb 18:[quote=Christophe Clavier]February 18, 2012 : The 2^9 * 3 * 11 * 31 driver has been captured on sequence 7044. This is the first time this rare driver appears on an aliquot sequence of leading term < 10,000.[/quote]I've worked this driver when it has appeared (several sequences turned up with it due to bchaffin's workers), so I'm going to work on this one too. (This one might be a little harder, though, since the driver was captured at 121 digits and has already advanced to 144 digits in 60 lines, the going looks to be very much uphill....)

[QUOTE=science_man_88;291799]I'm now above that 300 lines since starting and I still have that downdriver it looks like I'm currently dealing with a C114.[/QUOTE]

down to a C110 or lower and a C87 cofactor I think.

[QUOTE=science_man_88;292623]down to a C110 or lower and a C87 cofactor I think.[/QUOTE]

lowered to a C105 or lower.

[QUOTE=science_man_88;292739]lowered to a C105 or lower.[/QUOTE]

well the down driver broke ( now 2^2*3) I might release it soon ( I've had a good long run at it 375 lines from my start line, working on 376th now a C107 cofactor) depending on how high it goes. okay apparently it broke a while ago without me realizing still had a 68 line down driver run.

After breaking a [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=297789&postcount=12"]c153[/URL] on line 1758, this is from 363270 (the "real" one):[code]1761. 436765404644389850555980797758193094946425476215933961881022278563841354158896572513875097246712860219279004271788769418089629851136225099656059766412081717357158142864 = 2^4 * 3 * c166[/code]I'm hoping some ECM will shake something loose.....

I decided to switch from alternating between sequences to getting each one from 120 to 130 digits, starting the next one as soon as the previous is finished.

I am currently on the second and am getting the flattest curve I have ever seen. It has hovered around 125 digits for weeks (6 and counting) of run time. It is automated using aliqueit, so a 120 digit cofactor takes about 2 days. It has now hovered between 123 and 128 digits for over 200 indices.

There are likely other sequence out there that are this flat, but the chances I would get one can't be high.

The first one also took a very long time. From over 120 digits, it:
Dropping below 40
Up to over 120
Waffled for a bit
Dropped back down in a drive that nearly made it to 15 digits
Hit 2^4 * 31 to goes all the way back up to 130 digits.

The odds of getting 2 sequences that both take so long must be very low.

I don't think I will ever try to get from 130 to 140 digits. If I got one like these, it would take a year to complete.

The Graph:
[URL]http://factorization.ath.cx/aliquot.php?type=1&aq=182196&big=1[/URL]

Previous one for reference:
[URL="http://factorization.ath.cx/aliquot.php?type=1&aq=170766&big=1"]http://factorization.ath.cx/aliquot....q=170766&big=1[/URL]

[QUOTE=Raman;299248]@ Batalov - "Creyaufmüller" hasn't received your result from the sequence 345324" rather[/QUOTE]I've been emailing Wolfgang (and Clifford) updates as anything happens.

I sent 345324 off when it happened. I emailed him on 4/27 to see if he had received it. His reply was that he had just returned from a 2-week trip with his students with no connectivity......

(Must have been horrible for some of the kids! :razz:)

[QUOTE=Raman;299248]What lasted for only 3 lines - "Batalov" had actually called it to be a suspense. To keep it a mystery furthermore, I put it into the multiple nested code boxes, as such. The fact is being that following it,
you should have quite directly, automatically known to have scrolled down that code boxes already,[/QUOTE][SPOILER]That's what the spoiler tag is for.[/SPOILER]

[SIZE="1"](wblipp already unnested the code tags....if you're looking back to see what we're referring to, Raman had waaaay too many nested code tags.)[/SIZE]

7044 hit kind of a double milestone today: 3400 lines and 170 digits:[code] 3399 . c169 = 2^9 * 3 * 11 * 31 * 181 * 9406153 * 6732161621 * 938186663734514782716027912030453004243622194607284024260661626252310529864407512930533279887883197150575459981721056565212650862170917568028491
3400 . c170 = 2^9 * 3 * 11 * 31 * 10271 * 242932767194396333468243 * c136[/code]

Hmm, [URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=854628&action=last20&fr=0&to=100"]854628[/URL] mutated from a 2^5*7 guide (?) to 2^7*17.
[slightly OT]
Is that 17 a fluke or will it stay there a while? Are either 2^7 or 2^7*17 special in any way, esp. wrt. catching the downdriver?

Edit: A few lines later it went to 2^5 * 11^2 * 17, and as of this post line 1969 (what a year) is undergoing a quick NFS (but I'm going to bed).


[way OT]
And, while I'm making a post, while the Lehmer [strike]6[/strike] 5 are the only sequences < 1000 that aren't known to be finite, FDB reports 12 below 1000. Does anybody know how they terminate or have an .elf file?
[code][B]276 is not done yet[/B]
306 is not done yet
396 is not done yet
[B]552 is not done yet[/B]
[B]564 is not done yet[/B]
[B]660 is not done yet[/B]
696 is not done yet
780 is not done yet
828 is not done yet
888 is not done yet
[B]966 is not done yet[/B]
996 is not done yet
Total unfinished sequences: 12[/code]
[/OT]

Take a look at the first few steps of sequence 276 (not 278 as you wrote).

[QUOTE=smh;303069]Take a look at the first few steps of sequence 276.[/QUOTE]
The first 100 are almost all 2^2 * 7?

Edit: :doh!:

My bad, thanks LaurV. I thought he was answering my first question, not the second.

PS It's since evolved to just 2^5 and now it's 2^6.

[QUOTE=Dubslow;303070]The first 100 are almost all 2^2 * 7?[/QUOTE]
No. I believe he wanted to say: they merge.
(what's the second and third term of 276? Bingo!)

edit: this 5-minutes-small-handmade-graph with their merging below 2k may clarify some things... :razz:
(well, don't laugh, Saturday afternoon... you know how it is... )

" [I]Goooooooooooo-ooooooooo-oooaaaaaal'[/I]! "

The long shot for 511554 brought a [URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=511554&action=range&fr=1370&to=1380"]downer[/URL] at size 130. Sure, there's no way to say if it will stay around for two iterations ...or three, which seems to be frequently the case in my seqs, but I wanted to [I]sieze the capre diem[/I], :smile: you know. There are so few joys in life...

And here I've been [URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=854628&action=range&fr=2000&to=2104"]waffling with a plain 2^2[/URL] for 100+ iterations...



(Always make me think '[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIyixC9NsLI"]Waffle waffle waffle waffle mushroom mushroom[/URL]')

That's par for the course, man. Just wait patiently - you will get a resolution eventually too.

Some progress on [URL="http://factordb.com/aliquot.php?type=1&aq=669696&big=1"]669696[/URL]

[QUOTE=Dubslow;303541]And here I've been [URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=854628&action=range&fr=2000&to=2104"]waffling with a plain 2^2[/URL] for 100+ iterations...



(Always make me think '[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIyixC9NsLI"]Waffle waffle waffle waffle mushroom mushroom[/URL]')[/QUOTE]

2^2 has been called the down guide (its not a driver) but I think its more the 'stay the same guide'. It pick up and loses the 3 or 5 to alternate between rising and lowering. 2^2 is hard to lose too as it requires a single prime, or a pair of primes p,q = 1 mod 4.

My series I mentioned a bit above was stuck for 300 digits between 124 and finally pushed past 130 digits. It started increasing because it has a 3^3 term with the 2^2. If it drops that it will go back to flat again

In this range it took 14 weeks on a single cpu to go from 124 to 130 digits.

[URL]http://factorization.ath.cx/aliquot.php?type=1&aq=182196&big=1[/URL]

604770 went through [i]two[/i] [URL="http://factordb.com/aliquot.php?type=1&aq=604770&big=1"]downdriver runs[/URL]... back to 2*3 again (but hey, that's what it was after the first run!)

[URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=669696&action=last20"]669696[/URL] got the downdriver at index 8207 size 142 :smile:

[QUOTE=unconnected;305586][URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=669696&action=last20"]669696[/URL] got the downdriver at index 8207 size 142 :smile:[/QUOTE]Oooh, that means with a nice first run, this one has a chance of going over 10k lines! Good luck!

[QUOTE=unconnected;305586][URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=669696&action=last20"]669696[/URL] got the downdriver at index 8207 size 142 :smile:[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=schickel;305626]Oooh, that means with a nice first run, this one has a chance of going over 10k lines! Good luck![/QUOTE]

Wow... that's a helluva graph! :grin:

What are the chances?
 

:huh:

I use YAFU with Aliqueit. YAFU failed to find an ECM (to t38.15) factor of a C124, so it was poly searching. It found a poly that was way above average, terminated poly select, yafu prints "cofactor", aliqueit prints "warning! no factors found!", reverts to ECM, and by some stroke of luck finds a P40 factors within 30 seconds, tops.

[code]aprogs: 1558 entries, 2038 roots
hashtable: 2048 entries, 0.03 MB
coeff 29880 specialq 1 - 8999 other 23592 - 56620
aprogs: 3673 entries, 4777 roots
^C
Received signal 2... please wait

Received signal 2... please wait

Received signal 2... please wait
hashtable: 2048 entries, 0.03 MB
coeff 29700 specialq 1 - 8974 other 23611 - 56666
aprogs: 3741 entries, 4961 roots
hashtable: 4096 entries, 0.06 MB
<snip>
elapsed time of 8410.2988 seconds exceeds 12282 second deadline; poly select done


***factors found***


***co-factor***
C124 = 2741581336174137675408413282355830377876563823353341244804164095080990259983203246875718493191019923866142051580999771126277
WARNING: couldn't find factor in factor.log
*** Neat 40-digit factor found: 3586820655749381183230547402070106948283
3776 . c127 = 94310397964390336034049416...[/code]

How unlikely was that?

Likely enough; it's just a p40. I adjusted the "Neat" parameter much higher; occasionally get a p5x, then that's "Neat".

Here's a funnier one that I saw real time a few days ago.
[SIZE=1](I sometimes shoot out a burst of parallel 1e6 ECMs on any particular composite that one of many aliqueit instances is ECMing on one thread; if successful, I stop the ecm child process, inject the result into the aliqueit_ecm_temp.log and kill the ecm process. aliqueit gladly picks up the hint. I have little helper scripts for these atomic operations.)[/SIZE]
[CODE]Input number is 195654710131516879223457143880972979407255660467816631857383139055259775561429634280566441761 (93 digits)
Using B1=1000000, B2=1045563762, polynomial Dickson(6), sigma=80609963
Step 1 took 2028ms
Step 2 took 1680ms
********** Factor found in step 2: 523150669647234026276395642588481231783157081064619
Found composite factor of 51 digits: 523150669647234026276395642588481231783157081064619
Probable prime cofactor 373993041552348386923644286908663091506019 has 42 digits
[/CODE]
And as they say - so what. Completely uninteresting, it's a c51. Just funny.

658350 at i658 sz 136, with the dreaded 2^3*3*5, gfnsing the c97

[QUOTE=Batalov;305663]Likely enough; it's just a p40. I adjusted the "Neat" parameter much higher; occasionally get a p5x, then that's "Neat".[/QUOTE]
Well the thing is the short amount of time. I hit ^C on poly select, than looked away for two minutes, and when I came back, it was on the next line. For all I could see, stopping the poly select is what found the factor.

[URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=967230&action=range&fr=1554&to=1555"]Stupidly close call[/URL]

Between that and what the table reports, I think we have a grand total of 5 downdrivers currently :smile:

Edit: [URL="http://factordb.com/sequences.php?se=1&aq=967230&action=range&fr=1582&to=1583"]Another[/URL] :razz:

[strike]As it does not seem to be a reservation for 967230, and Dubslow found that it has currently a downdriver, may I hunt it? I would either terminate it or bring it to 130 digits, if nobody argue against it (did not start yet, waiting for confirmation that I am not stepping on any toes).[/strike]

edit: Ignore it. I did not finish to scratch my head and the sequence sunk like a rock... DB elves are faster novadays then they used to be in my time... :D

edit2: well, not really... Needed some push here and there. My fingers are ticklin' couldn't resist...