[QUOTE=pdazzl;381888]@Batalov

Are you still ecm'ing 9100919? Is it fair game for folks to test as well?
[/QUOTE]
Why not. Be my guest.

I'll TF 9100919 another bit for fun...

[QUOTE=TheMawn;381894]Okay, this helps a lot. Thanks.

Increasing the B1 increases the maximum size of the factors which can be found, yes? Does that mean we start with smaller B1's for the sake of quickly finding some small factors but we eventually go bigger to find the bigger ones?

EDIT: As a followup question, I would ask if that means that after a significant amount of, say, B1 = 10,000,000, doing B1 = 1,000,000 is pointless?[/QUOTE]Increases the B1 increases the [b]likelihood[/b] of finding larger factors. Your second question is a fair statement of the standard approach.

As to your follow-up: not pointless but less efficient than using the larger value.

If you are definitely planning on running for example 35 digit ecm then there is no point in running ecm at lower bounds.
The reason we normally do are that it is slower to search for 30 digit factors at 1e6(35 digit bounds) than 25e4. If there is a 30 digit factor that completes the factorization then that means time is wasted. The chances of that happening here are very small.

That is indeed the case - I hadn't checked that. Sigma=7053813379423454 and Sigma=5700725959011386 both find the same factor, 9662183525912193406922912529583, for M27529. So no worries then.

According to ECM progress page, the equivalent of 280 curves with B1=50,000 have now been completed on M7508981.

11 curves B1=1e6
 

[code][Tue Sep 02 21:04:30 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PCVICTOR, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[Wed Sep 03 10:26:05 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PCVICTOR, M7508981 completed 3 ECM curves, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[Wed Sep 03 15:57:28 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PCVICTOR, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[/code][code]
[Wed Sep 03 00:12:20 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[Wed Sep 03 00:53:46 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[Wed Sep 03 21:04:54 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[Wed Sep 03 22:33:29 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[Thu Sep 04 18:23:58 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[Thu Sep 04 19:54:59 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[/code]I uploaded these 11 curves to primenet some time ago. They can also be found at mersenne.org:
[URL]http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=7508981&exp_hi=7508981&full=1[/URL]
but Mersenne.ca is only displaying 3 of my 11 curves. Are the 1 curve results not reported to the mersenne.ca page?
[URL]http://www.mersenne.ca/exponent.php?exponentdetails=7508981[/URL]

[QUOTE=VictordeHolland;382577][code][Tue Sep 02 21:04:30 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PCVICTOR, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[Wed Sep 03 10:26:05 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PCVICTOR, M7508981 completed 3 ECM curves, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[Wed Sep 03 15:57:28 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PCVICTOR, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[/code][code]
[Wed Sep 03 00:12:20 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[Wed Sep 03 00:53:46 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[Wed Sep 03 21:04:54 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[Wed Sep 03 22:33:29 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[Thu Sep 04 18:23:58 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[Thu Sep 04 19:54:59 2014]
UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx
[/code]I uploaded these 11 curves to primenet some time ago. They can also be found at mersenne.org:
[URL]http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=7508981&exp_hi=7508981&full=1[/URL]
but Mersenne.ca is only displaying 3 of my 11 curves. Are the 1 curve results not reported to the mersenne.ca page?
[URL]http://www.mersenne.ca/exponent.php?exponentdetails=7508981[/URL][/QUOTE]

Why does it matter?

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;382600]Why does it matter?[/QUOTE]Possibly because he's found a bug in the system which may affect other people? Who knows?

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;382600]Why does it matter?[/QUOTE]

What exactly drives you to interject so often? I think it's clear enough that people here are having a good time (read: fun) contributing a bit of computing power to an exponent with many factors for no particular reason.

This has all been primarily for the enjoyment. People are using [B]their[/B] own hardware as [B]they[/B] please. I for one am getting sick of your negativity. None of your posts have generated any enjoyment. I request that you leave this discussion, Robert.

[QUOTE=TheMawn;382642]What exactly drives you to interject so often? I think it's clear enough that people here are having a good time (read: fun) contributing a bit of computing power to an exponent with many factors for no particular reason.

This has all been primarily for the enjoyment. People are using [B]their[/B] own hardware as [B]they[/B] please. I for one am getting sick of your negativity. None of your posts have generated any enjoyment. I request that you leave this discussion, Robert.[/QUOTE]

We all know that RDS has a pathological hatred of anybody enjoying themselves and is incapable of admitting that he is ever wrong about anything at all period.

Why, take for the instance the thread the other day other optimising TF code for cpu's.

In the RDS universe that would add absolutely nothing to the project - slight paraphrase but that's the gist.

When it was pointed out to him that finding a factor with TF removes the need for an LL test and that therefore he was demonstrably wrong he wandered off into some other fantasy land and tried to reframe his question as he had been caught out.

Quick quiz, which of these 3 outcomes add to the project? The proposed new member to the project doesn't have a high end gpu and is only interested in factoring on the cpu and [U]nothing else[/U].

1. CPU does anything other than work on GIMPS
2. CPU does TF with non optimised code
3. CPU does TF with optimised code

Of course it's 3 then 2. Unless you're RDS of course in which case options 2 & 3 are a waste of resources.

Yours truly - The Village Idiot