[QUOTE=jyb;529873]I think you're misunderstanding what he said above. The "brain damage" he referred to is that he accidentally left this number out of the set of composites on which he was running ECM back in September. He never tried to do post-processing of this number.[/QUOTE]

I understood him perfectly Jon. Please credit him for this one, I don’t mind, ok?

[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;529885]I understood him perfectly Jon. Please credit him for this one, I don’t mind, ok?[/QUOTE]

Please don't.

[QUOTE=jyb;529833]Oversights happen, no big deal. However, I do see that you sent me a factor report for 11+6,291 in September. Since that one was nowhere near the first 5 holes, I'm wondering if there was just a more general mix-up with that table. Is that something you can check?[/QUOTE]

A [b]guess[/b]:

I extract the numbers I want by searching for the letter 'C' in the tables.
Note that /C searches from the top, and ?C searches from the bottom. '/' and '?'
are the same key. I suspect that I hit ? instead of / while selecting candidates

Or it may have been some other typo while editing/extracting.... It is hard to know.
It was definitely a screw-up.

Note: It is not something that I worry about.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;529899]Please don't.[/QUOTE]

Fair enough.

reserving 43810414183_19m1.

5p4_425 factored
 

[CODE]p63 factor: 165952240558687686017704893971249267264234726886437182029579901
p106 factor: 3895302994064295375210109311767243614834642421399481397035028171643694740894953493756387739182215092132101[/CODE]
205M unique relations built an 8.2M matrix using TD=136. (140 failed)
Solve time about 48.5 hours. (-t 4)

Log at: [url]https://pastebin.com/Liu1AUrG[/url]

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;529916]A [b]guess[/b]:

I extract the numbers I want by searching for the letter 'C' in the tables.
Note that /C searches from the top, and ?C searches from the bottom. '/' and '?'
are the same key. I suspect that I hit ? instead of / while selecting candidates

Or it may have been some other typo while editing/extracting.... It is hard to know.
It was definitely a screw-up.

Note: It is not something that I worry about.[/QUOTE]

Sure, I'm not too concerned with how it happened. But I am wondering if it's possible to figure out which numbers you actually did your ECM on. You said you had the input file, right? Can you look and see which numbers are in it?

[QUOTE=jyb;529943]Sure, I'm not too concerned with how it happened. But I am wondering if it's possible to figure out which numbers you actually did your ECM on. You said you had the input file, right? Can you look and see which numbers are in it?[/QUOTE]

For 11,6+ I did 241, 251, 262, 263 and 291

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;529947]For 11,6+ I did 241, 251, 262, 263 and 291[/QUOTE]

Perfect, thanks.

[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;529776]Taking 8m7_295[/QUOTE]


Nice split.


[CODE]Thu Nov 07 08:07:08 2019 p80 factor: 20590739586814317749546391855638550279870455368181837791860872034767906407690471
Thu Nov 07 08:07:08 2019 p81 factor: 123275227913925256367596129986355878801973817525204451582562264478242189738599361[/CODE]




[url]https://pastebin.com/pFG84Xe0[/url]

11p7_242 completed - 36 hours for 5.7M matrix (TD=130)
[CODE]prp53 factor: 12162794501913992585581638449547391118373840760988633
prp141 factor: 283937106243180358850642901005566360692698670844695789117204304543488673026540711598055892329223133890145033457124622449530830651182116288069[/CODE]
[url]https://pastebin.com/JBehsATW[/url]


Rather small factor and the matrix was built after 3rd attempt (matrix not dense enough, retrying). Oversieved task?

[QUOTE=unconnected;530002]11p7_242 completed - 36 hours for 5.7M matrix (TD=130)
[CODE]prp53 factor: 12162794501913992585581638449547391118373840760988633
prp141 factor: 283937106243180358850642901005566360692698670844695789117204304543488673026540711598055892329223133890145033457124622449530830651182116288069[/CODE]
[url]https://pastebin.com/JBehsATW[/url]


Rather small factor and the matrix was built after 3rd attempt (matrix not dense enough, retrying). Oversieved task?[/QUOTE]

This one was a first hole, so it's likely just an ECM miss for the P53.

Yeah, it could be oversieved. 121M unique is a lot for a relatively low-difficulty 30-bit job. If you're interested, try limiting it to e.g. 100M relations and see if the filtering works better.