I'm trying out the new save files on those with <506 bits. Here's a hit for 12+5,257:

[CODE]Input number is 12029311701883957907689034304937942658143192303274525228459040826287469109253891538274048901308766638762299979357 (113 digits)
Using B1=11000000, B2=11000004, sigma=3:803316517-3:803317348 (832 curves)
GPU: Block: 16x32x1 Grid: 26x1x1 (832 parallel curves)
Computing 832 Step 1 took 81212ms of CPU time / 1641781ms of GPU time
Computing 832 Step 2 on CPU took 285ms
[/CODE]

[CODE]Input number is 12029311701883957907689034304937942658143192303274525228459040826287469109253891538274048901308766638762299979357 (113 digits)
Using B1=11000000-11000000, B2=35133391030, polynomial Dickson(12), sigma=3:803317220
Step 1 took 0ms
Step 2 took 13745ms
********** Factor found in step 2: 402984266929957102322279494407189790871178450617
Found prime factor of 48 digits: 402984266929957102322279494407189790871178450617
Prime cofactor 29850574052248989193545685028694637669120007246958199202158529221 has 65 digits
[/CODE]

I'll take 7+5,336 for a quick trial SNFS run.

[QUOTE=frmky;431062]Look in the save file to see if X=0x0. If so, it's broken.[/QUOTE]
[c]X=0x0; CHECKSUM=0; PROGRAM=GMP-ECM 7.0.1-dev; X0=0x0; Y0=0x0;[/c]

Bummer. :furious:

4^425-3^425
[CODE]prp56 = 78781661398887559837662281141443961505557227499537855401
prp62 = 65597237494409113106219655168615127530467247753655240445290751
[/CODE]YAFU correctly detected the special form of number, determined that it is better to use gnfs instead of snfs, but decided to sieve on the -r side with 14e siever. Is this a bug or I'm missing something?

[CODE]nfs: commencing nfs on c118: 516785935298695014028131273546939635138070898235176891461525586077861157563599026624800
3321976021855073015024440696151
nfs: input divides 4^425 - 3^425
nfs: commencing snfs on c118: 51678593529869501402813127354693963513807089823517689146152558607786115756359902662480
03321976021855073015024440696151
nfs: input snfs form is better done by gnfs: difficulty = 204.70, size = 144
nfs: commencing poly selection with 8 threads
nfs: setting deadline of 1406 seconds
nfs: completed 212 ranges of size 250 in 1478.3857 seconds
nfs: best poly = # norm 3.209350e-11 alpha -7.091678 e 3.745e-10 rroots 5
[/CODE]

Probably a bug. Likely it didn't go back to evaluate sides after having already done so when finding the snfs poly. You can restart with -a on the command line to use algebraic side.

Since Paul's site is still down, I've factored these so far. I'm putting all my results in factordb.com.
[CODE]5-2,441
7+5,357
7+5,363
7+6,336
8-3,309
9-2,315
10+9,306
12+11,285
12-11,285
[/CODE]

[QUOTE=frmky;431142]Since Paul's site is still down, I've factored these so far. I'm putting all my results in factordb.com.
[CODE]5-2,441
7+5,357
7+5,363
7+6,336
8-3,309
9-2,315
10+9,306
12+11,285
12-11,285
[/CODE][/QUOTE]Oh dear. Down again?

It seems to be back now, so I'll add recent results and update the page.

BTW, I received all these by email, my preferred means of communication. Greg knows this so think of it as a gentle reminder to others. However, Greg's post also serves notice to others who may otherwise be tempted to waste time on these candidates, so please feel free to post here [B]as well as emailing[/B] me.

Paul

[QUOTE=jyb;430960]Thanks for the update, Paul. Here are some additions and corrections:

1) The sieving for 4-3,409 and 6+5,316 (shown above) was done by NFS@Home, with post-processing by Rich Dickerson. I don't know if you want the credit to reflect that.

2) You may want to have Serge verify his factoring method. The factors for 11+8,289, 5-4,397, and 6+5,383 (shown above) were almost certainly found by ECM.

3) 5-2,353 was factored by Greg Childers and NFS@Home, finishing on 2016-03-30. This date is before your April 1 cutoff, so I don't know how you want to handle that.

4) 6+5,317 was factored by Rich Dickerson and NFS@Home, reported on 2016-03-31. This one is already reflected in your tables, but doesn't appear in either the UPDATE.txt or HISTORICAL.txt files. Same issue with the April 1 cutoff.[/QUOTE]
1) Now added credit.

2) Corrected.

3) Decided it will go into UPDATE.txt because I didn't learn about it until April 7.

4) Ditto.

Thanks for the proof reading. Things can get a little hectic when factors come flooding in and errors are made.

Paul

[QUOTE=xilman;431199]
It seems to be back now, so I'll add recent results and update the page.[/QUOTE]Now updated. Please let me know of any errors.

Paul

4^451+3^451

[CODE]Using B1=11000000, B2=35133391030, polynomial Dickson(12), sigma=2714632188
Step 1 took 116721ms
Step 2 took 35901ms
********** Factor found in step 2: 7223419090702674950895250983822046673260009
Found probable prime factor of 43 digits: 7223419090702674950895250983822046673260009
Probable prime cofactor <...> has 152 digits[/CODE]

4^443+3^443

[CODE]Using B1=11000000, B2=35133391030, polynomial Dickson(12), sigma=2684575918
Step 1 took 113518ms
Step 2 took 36152ms
********** Factor found in step 2: 26547165838734827895448382886534887411467
Found probable prime factor of 41 digits: 26547165838734827895448382886534887411467
Probable prime cofactor <...> has 187 digits[/CODE]