Well, vk can do that. But if you want a specialized program, write one! :smile:

I figure that all I have to do is make some substitutions/additions/deletions to vk to get it working.

[QUOTE=CRGreathouse]Well, vk can do that. But if you want a specialized program, write one!
[/QUOTE]

You'd have to depend on the odds, though.

Joining GIMPS.
 

I decided to join GIMPS: I was assigned the following number, since I chose trial factoring work: 2[sup]75325247[/sup] - 1. I'm trial factoring to 590295810358705651712, or 2[sup]69[/sup]

Is the 70M range the current interest for trial factoring, or was that a rare fluke?

Found a prime: 63483 * 10[sup]8490[/sup] + 1 (8495 digits?)

Also found
83529* 48[sup]7890[/sup] +1 (13270 digits)
468550* 1999[sup]5346[/sup] +1 (17652 digits)
515361* 1296[sup]5680[/sup] +1 (17686 digits)

Searches ongoing:

k * 2[sup]856780[/sup] + 1 (≈257920 digits)
k * 798336[sup]20160[/sup] + 1 (≈119000 digits)

[QUOTE=3.14159;227268]I figure that all I have to do is make some substitutions/additions/deletions to vk to get it working.[/QUOTE]

All you have to do, really, is remove the exponent.

[QUOTE=3.14159;227269]You'd have to depend on the odds, though.[/QUOTE]

I don't know what that means.

[QUOTE=CRGreathouse]All you have to do, really, is remove the exponent.
[/QUOTE]

No point in doing so. In fact, no changes at all should be made. The exponent should simply be set to 1.

[QUOTE=3.14159;227272]I decided to join GIMPS: I was assigned the following number, since I chose trial factoring work: 2[sup]75325247[/sup] - 1. I'm trial factoring to 590295810358705651712, or 2[sup]69[/sup]

Is the 70M range the current interest for trial factoring, or was that a rare fluke?[/QUOTE]

That seems to be the typical range for trial division. ECM isn't that far yet, as I recall, and the LL tests are just below the ECM range.

[QUOTE=CRGreathouse]That seems to be the typical range for trial division. ECM isn't that far yet, as I recall, and the LL tests are just below the ECM range.
[/QUOTE]

What range is ECM reserved for?

[QUOTE=3.14159;227278]No point in doing so. In fact, no changes at all should be made. The exponent should simply be set to 1.[/QUOTE]

That was the meaning of post #925: "vk can do that".

You could produce a specialized script without the exponent, removing the extra operation, but it won't save you much time.

Of course it will be slower to use vk like this: for a given size, it's much faster to use a power (say, n = 856780 or even 100) than a non-power (n = 1).

[QUOTE=3.14159;227281]What range is ECM reserved for?[/QUOTE]

Dunno, change your settings to ask for it and see. My understanding, rightly or wrongly, is that ECM is most needed right now -- that there's an increasingly small pool of ECM'd exponents ready for LL.