![]() |
|
|
#12 |
|
Oct 2004
Austria
2·17·73 Posts |
Yes, I have already started with 7,393+. By now I have sieved ~60% of the subrange of 20-30M and ~40% of the subrange of 30-40M, so it will still take quite a while.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 | |
|
Noodles
"Mr. Tuch"
Dec 2007
Chennai, India
4E916 Posts |
Quote:
![]() Few Questions/Clarifications please: 1) While sieving any (say Cunningham) number (composite), we sieve from (for example 50M-150M range of special-q, etc.) leaving out the smaller special-q values? Why is this so, that lower range is being ignored up? 2) While sieving for any sextic upon the algebraic side, the yields per special-q for the lower special-q values/ranges are high, but for that quartics, sieving upon the rational side, the yields for the higher (or intermediate rather?) special-q are at peak? Why is this so, again, thus? Repeatedly... Last fiddled with by Raman on 2010-04-29 at 22:10 Reason: ny nuch |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Noodles
"Mr. Tuch"
Dec 2007
Chennai, India
3·419 Posts |
Alert, please notice that
From my side, 5,400+ is certainly due tomorrow (May 1) 3,581+ falling upon May 3 This is for 100% sure, of course! Please wake up! 5,400+ linear algebra completed 9742777 of 10066956 dimensions (96.8%, ETA 11h33m) Last fiddled with by Raman on 2010-04-30 at 09:53 |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Mar 2007
Germany
23×3×11 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Noodles
"Mr. Tuch"
Dec 2007
Chennai, India
3×419 Posts |
Thus, I'm sorry for making you up to unreserve that number.
If you wish, you can send that relations you have accumulated, range of special-q sieved, polynomial to whoever is willing to do so with this number, in order to earn up with your own credit for that candidate. (Is that Juno Fernandez, in any case?) Last fiddled with by Raman on 2010-04-30 at 15:52 |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2
948810 Posts |
That's Juno Fukos.
P.S. Don't expect people to jump from their beds for each and every of your messages. Many simply don't see your messages. You are on their ignore list. _____ Ok, a clarification: This was in reference to the "Wake up" call earlier. Wake up to learn that some progress is 96.8%?! I don't think so. I'd rather keep on sleeping. Even if with ear plugs... Last fiddled with by Batalov on 2010-05-01 at 02:13 |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville
20C016 Posts |
Batalov I'm probably on every ignore list of all the people who have read my posts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 | |
|
Jun 2005
lehigh.edu
210 Posts |
Quote:
I'm sure I've read a couple; but none worth locating this ignore_list. Could you review a few of the worst, so that I can see whether it's worth drilling-in on ignoring posters. Skipping on to the next post doesn't suffice? Seems like more their problem than yours. IMHO. -bd (end of semester here) PS -- So, can I drift on back off now? Yawn, ... PPS - and howcum have I accumulated three (count 'um, 3) emails from Serge since I last looked? Last fiddled with by bdodson on 2010-05-01 at 02:56 Reason: 3p568 finished sieving!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 | |
|
Noodles
"Mr. Tuch"
Dec 2007
Chennai, India
125710 Posts |
Quote:
By wake up, I meant that "Be prepared to hear the factors of 5,400+ tomorrow and then 3,581+ upon May 3, 2010 exactly" At 96.8% the running time exceeded the wall time that I specified, so that it had to be restarted, resuming from that previous checkpoint. Even since today morning, many dependencies had consistently failed in order to provide me up with that factor. Code:
prp99 factor: 570816590874389863426712610221376823983504352706521883023381652903468683124270020472964342360390401 prp106 factor: 7835600763231051163105353109871851898738295732904084174621530049314756920200268556563336013502822700910401 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 | |
|
Jun 2005
lehigh.edu
210 Posts |
Quote:
but am willing to be prepared for another factor report soon, while hoping not to hear new/worrisome error reports. I once had an especially network literate student, that none-the-less reported being usually surprized when something computing related _did_ work correctly. We're especially fortunate that msieve works so well over such a range of users/sites. Usually; more often than not. The first clue seems to be an end-date on page 116 ("factors from A to B", rather than "factors from A to ..."). On the topic of my inbox, today's had a reply from Sam confirming four new B+D numbers; three "conveyer" numbers, and another/harder 16e snfs. -Bruce |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
"Robert Gerbicz"
Oct 2005
Hungary
2×743 Posts |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Overall Project Progress | KEP | Conjectures 'R Us | 54 | 2018-01-04 18:25 |
| Progress | bsquared | YAFU | 20 | 2014-05-22 16:52 |
| Nice progress! | schickel | FactorDB | 29 | 2012-07-18 17:03 |
| Progress | R.D. Silverman | Factoring | 0 | 2012-05-22 14:03 |
| Picturing progress | ATH | Data | 1 | 2006-06-22 23:04 |