And 4 more:
sigma(1698497861089953227001546107344598199560223472222257789665996127034306321^2)
r1=204630461119621585460700928972793806889239 (pp42)
r2=222203314449703241625379578264076844644842291917576071 (pp54)

sigma(1394034488518460939015339291788339^4)
r1=3926842051899378424387439271829213480570986485911 (pp49)
r2=1275020904082600099225620039500620697445185670592835351 (pp55)

sigma(1494030148731726710157348562105207^4)
r1=3746265162929659365445222351906524329119230471039023021 (pp55)
r2=1329961079654792199001825497574293113280721426538092988085938165419768454116981 (pp79)

sigma(1519187846163442572072799632030733^4)
r1=1971675877921426067612975726029422241239269619670995511 (pp55)
r2=3406463914276184814629387056379475667042942186840622367962851231137294511 (pp73)

I've got enough reserved numbers for now.

Chris K

One more roadblock cleared thanks to yoyo's BOINC ECM:

42801337607665680328372002965524743220484797 | sigma(3^1038)

Post 130 has been updated.

William

4 more:
sigma(1944848086522004636322313228532894639^4)
r1=10281486474251195628544540985191949471 (pp38)
r2=50705139449757806383321502904709743563043402385437160261 (pp56)

sigma(12240911040103795579906843864700642393963359910824110430387939553546861^2)
r1=104853898555816071075561334399554577 (pp36)
r2=104765964161021065238127373001430385904680275703332891154057 (pp60)

sigma(15194813938078770915091^6)
r1=679479933377800596325044316839619001 (pp36)
r2=4751611602466958756471888351243823188082943026523369264365621689 (pp64)

sigma(1906580383045014957623547756949339^4)
r1=796291163194169668418250289076411125484302236814122241 (pp54)
r2=1568819215822986572402160865892809287983954174823011703722289928175801761 (pp73)

And reserving:
sigma(1156615962758801041713418748849892945818073569293154699735705591791^2)
sigma(13189649827^16)
sigma(13378770390594513113189533947074191247524887689017724425653077018711297899^2)
sigma(15703435148324280113622164330056583035944617129750989357369^2)

Chris K

And another 4:
sigma(2616458911833394499755349207477090939^4)
r1=9983908223798929720581720635760099803465515951 (pp46)
r2=9421520905332553955400809603691477002323503015661 (pp49)

sigma(263152813162391930375710921^6)
r1=945053711310346011821072190139509929 (pp36)
r2=102232199788133528120592697591115902576307079216442756846127 (pp60)

sigma(6244756561400247183978608333534940251947919207224171630342627211^2)
r1=4357624379013105641223983372419642529385619 (pp43)
r2=4486820677284589058674766794304278281925017013818103 (pp52)

sigma(65701231097378375375460212827313559961417448560515352147952562525667^2)
r1=29450576679117437270799742719314473 (pp35)
r2=511618111473863277744175683567890321704794494994343015719181 (pp60)

And reserving:
sigma(1677211625909510958785557464853246403856859091284205617^2)
sigma(17022163361763288294833189758315621^4)
sigma(1884664366420860240527803454782447348348074241249117181^2)
sigma(22211407034786332609931^6)

Chris K

4 more results:
sigma(756067249349405037080689042255339999621^4)
r1=742196648036555838026802281355443280844781 (pp42)
r2=79227063494880223461158587123743347772428026677959861 (pp53)

sigma(1156615962758801041713418748849892945818073569293154699735705591791^2)
r1=163555034501277778823293436430871039 (pp36)
r2=1176516157904788702725262331836840747438798166048341088352463 (pp61)

sigma(13189649827^16)
r1=263902418054215872621857124203082709645371023 (pp45)
r2=536674768989304015493877600051896493697528656259489 (pp51)

sigma(13378770390594513113189533947074191247524887689017724425653077018711297899^2)
r1=641179313052511934267246953663122620404044725143 (pp48)
r2=1087708446646879091518173701011100064164209257601 (pp49)

And reserving:
sigma(2323867587228675739071004159824960200129979239887133119517036364709^2)
sigma(24604366409396047293567846569373542155040418347749835660029587923^2)
sigma(24695054790253283552629^6)
sigma(2498612635012792722138685691014550042878746426207630990797^2)

Chris K

This number is in the [URL="http://www.lri.fr/~ochem/opn/t500.txt"]t500 file[/URL]. Anand Nair factored it up from the [URL="http://www.oddperfect.org/composites.html"]Odd Perfect Composites Page[/URL].

[code]
400706797255068758036954693985521^7-1

p56 factor: 30098539050680311702458111914811677994289088145163988149
p98 factor: 88931163070724544204652892142895007334147687983353199527803564382344538413856373394347589320865413
[/code]

Another roadblock cleared. [XTBA>TSA] IvanleFou, one of yoyo@home's BOINC ECM participants, found

660171830929524521124583804710877725365663 | 52379047267^47-1

I've updated post 130 in this thread to show the factors found and separate the remaining roadblocks.

William

3 more:
sigma(15703435148324280113622164330056583035944617129750989357369^2)
r1=10174509798226734209447266060556119 (pp35)
r2=18705681565413220522301742075582865589174459951380536756942889 (pp62)

sigma(22211407034786332609931^6)
r1=23225059966804709384757444200708777 (pp35)
r2=5170107592311117975301307282391787815455789234120919414331777798275203547317174195181560881008833381 (pp100)

sigma(24695054790253283552629^6)
r1=17368278315564586083988966750966943564125908320329953652757 (pp59)
r2=517553809835998260509200117865250416195653660489366153781429 (pp60)

And reserving:
sigma(2519978099331417407699246583668837^4)
sigma(2548473366680149205723573032433689^4)
sigma(2685471803606073017685565277688019^4)

About how much ECM has been run against the numbers in t1000.txt? I may be approaching the point where running more ECM would be more efficient than NFS.

Chris K

[QUOTE=chris2be8;209648]About how much ECM has been run against the numbers in t1000.txt? I may be approaching the point where running more ECM would be more efficient than NFS.
Chris K[/QUOTE]

Not much, I was focusing on t700 last weeks.
After your post I started to run a few curves at 3e6 on t1000 and got more than a few factors.
ECM pre-testing on your reserved numbers for NFS cannot hurt.
ECM on the whole t1000.txt is not a bad idea either.

4 more:
sigma(1677211625909510958785557464853246403856859091284205617^2)
r1=163182777191725454844199614818377 (pp33)
r2=3186887357111453906323524434700530188894964019851547589179526519 (pp64)

sigma(17022163361763288294833189758315621^4)
r1=837922407426481450306868235308403565286995381 (pp45)
r2=675957267933648412532945745487595383557470896245571 (pp51)

sigma(1884664366420860240527803454782447348348074241249117181^2)
r1=80501114398478447330268283163642725263844362901 (pp47)
r2=8212441746773977603001092270342839651790533854683 (pp49)

sigma(2323867587228675739071004159824960200129979239887133119517036364709^2)
r1=1210629253655323375277582556679595868948427 (pp43)
r2=121469996607907863195183712820121342538374685451780611 (pp54)

I've just updated my script to use msieve for GNFS polynomial selection instead of using polyselect or pol51opt via factMsieve.pl. I was pleasantly surprised when the next GNFS number took under 3 hours instead of nearly 7 hours which the previous number took (both were 96 digits).

This makes ECM pre-testing a bit less urgent for GNFS numbers. And since they've all had ECM to 1E6 done and some curves at 3E6 I'm not yet at the point where I need to run more ECM against them. I would want to upgrade the system I'm using to 64 bit Linux first because ECM runs about 3 times faster on a 64 bit OS than a 32 bit OS (GGNFS doesn't seem much different) so it would be a waste to run ECM slowed down that much.

Reserving the next batch (more numbers because of the new speed of GNFS):
sigma(27192117212962951448951^6)
sigma(28520315240798063300089^6)
sigma(30338765944539971896291^6)
sigma(3089634785345678922991114345911637^4)
sigma(31028650949093505792121^6)
sigma(33078961023750744607951^6)

Chris K

For 96-digit inputs you were probably using polyselect, which was the only way to generate degree 4 polynomials easily until that capability was added to msieve. The msieve polynomials are really enormously better.