![]() |
|
|
#34 | |
|
"Robert Gerbicz"
Oct 2005
Hungary
2×743 Posts |
Quote:
x=2 1680=2^4*3*5*7 1681=41^2 1682=2*29^2 1683=3^2*11*17 strength=log(1681)/log(41)=2 ========================================== x=3 3678723=3^3*19*71*101 3678724=2^2*7^2*137^2 3678725=5^2*37*41*97 3678726=2*3*83^2*89 strength=log(3678723)/log(101)=3.27577 ========================================== x=4 22377473780=2^2*5*139*179*193*233 22377473781=3*13*43*103*353*367 22377473782=2*19^3*67*97*251 22377473783=7*29*31*107*167*199 strength=log(22377473781)/log(367)=4.03554 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Jan 2005
Transdniestr
50310 Posts |
Actually, your x=2 answer doesn't fit the original definition.
I'm wrong about x=3 and x=4. I thought those answers weren't smooth enough. Which leads me to, when you were running for x=3, did you get a false positive with 3027675. I did when I ran it for 25 3. Last fiddled with by grandpascorpion on 2006-08-09 at 20:39 |
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
"Robert Gerbicz"
Oct 2005
Hungary
2·743 Posts |
One really large 74 bits smoothtrio for x=5 found by the smoothtriosgmp program:
16692872914488219204860=2^2*5*13*3853*6133*6299*20639*20899 16692872914488219204861=3^28*7^2*1579*9431 16692872914488219204862=2*97*167*277*563*12841*14951*17209 Now it is saving the found smoothtrios and you can continue the program because it is saving the program's d,x,n value after every 1000000-th iteration. If you want to continue the computation then don't give d and x, because if the number of the input pararmeters isn't 2 then the program will use the smoothtriosstat.txt file. But note that this gmp version is about 15% slower than smoothtrio.c for d<=62. You can see the source in the attachment. Last fiddled with by R. Gerbicz on 2006-08-09 at 21:12 |
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
"Robert Gerbicz"
Oct 2005
Hungary
2·743 Posts |
And here it is an exe for P4.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#38 | ||
|
"Robert Gerbicz"
Oct 2005
Hungary
27168 Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Jan 2005
Transdniestr
503 Posts |
That's fine but it's not really a valid answer.
Thanks for the gmp version. Last fiddled with by grandpascorpion on 2006-08-09 at 22:02 |
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Jan 2005
Transdniestr
503 Posts |
Hi R.,
I tweaked your code to check duos and found min answers through the 9th power/term. I decided to use your variant of the definition and submitted all three lists to OEIS, citing your program. Solutions and factorizations: 3=3,2=2 9=3^2, 8= 2^3 2401=7^4, 2400=2^5*3*5^2 (3rd and 4th term) 5909761=11^2*13^2*17^2, 5909760=2^8*3^5*5*19 1611308700=2^2*3^6*5^2*23*31^2, 1611308699=7^4*11*13^2*19^2 421138799640=2^3*3^5*5*13^4*37*41, 421138799639=17*19*23^2*31*43^3 2286831727304145=3^15*5*7^3*19*67*73, 2286831727304144=2^4*17*23^2*37*41^2*59*61*71 3948741978036988496=2^4*7^5*13*23*43*59^3*67*83, 3948741978036988495=5*11*17*31*97^2*101*103*109*113^2 I submitted these. I decided to use your variant of the definition. ================================================= On a related note, I found some addition terms for http://www.research.att.com/~njas/sequences/?q=A002072 using a modified version of your program. This list (n and n+1) takes extends this list up to prime = 97. There's no counterexamples < 2^62. 31887350832896 31887350832896 119089041053696 2286831727304144 2286831727304144 17451620110781856 166055401586083680 166055401586083680 Incidentally, for duos, the max value log(n)/log(max prime) was 9.287 for the pair below: 4108258965739505499=3^7*13*19*23^4*47*73*89^2 4108258965739505500=2^2*5^3*7^2*11*29^2*31^2*43^2*101^2 10 would be quite a challenge I think. Last fiddled with by grandpascorpion on 2006-09-09 at 17:44 Reason: Add'l information |
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
"Robert Gerbicz"
Oct 2005
Hungary
2·743 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#42 | |
|
Jun 2003
2×7×113 Posts |
Quote:
Could I have a copy of the modified program. Is it possible to look for smooth consecutive pairs, using the solution of pell equations, than sieving all numbers and then finding smooth numbers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stormer%27s_theorem Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Jan 2005
Transdniestr
503 Posts |
Hi Citrix,
Thanks for this link. To be frank, my script (originally R. Gerbicz's) has a totally different algorithm. Don Reble has already written a script (which I assume is much more efficientwith Pell approach in Python: http://www.research.att.com/~njas/se...a002072.py.txt It would be a good little exercise to convert this to a C program. |
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Aug 2007
Canberra, Australia
3·11 Posts |
Sequences A002072 and A117581 are the same, only the latter uses the higher value of each pair as the sequence value.
This is preferable, I think, since the only published tables, the 1964 results of Dick Lehmer, use that convention, and his proofs are given in the same terms. Both sequences have the same inconvenient feature, though - those pairs of duplicate values might preserve the monotonicity (if that's a word!) of the sequence, but only by omitting useful information. Writing gpd(n) for greatest prime divisor of n, what is S'(23), the greatest S for which n = S(S-1) has gpd(n) = 23? The answer of course is 5142501, but this is less than S'(23) = 11859211, so it gets left behind! Anyway, here is a list that fills in those entries, and which extends the sequence to the 35th prime: Code:
N pN S'(pN) log2(S') ============================================= 1. 2 2 1 2. 3 9 3.1699 3. 5 81 4. 7 4375 5. 11 9801 6. 13 123201 7. 17 336141 8. 19 11859211 23.4995 9. 23 5142501 22.2940 10. 29 177182721 27.4077 11. 31 1611308700 30.5856 12. 37 3463200000 31.6895 13. 41 63927525376 35.8957 14. 43 421138799640 38.6155 15. 47 1109496723126 40.0103 16. 53 1453579866025 40.4027 17. 59 20628591204481 44.2297 18. 61 31887350832897 44.8580 19. 67 12820120234376 43.5435 20. 71 119089041053697 46.7090 21. 73 2286831727304145 51.0223 22. 79 9591468737351909376 63.0565 23. 83 17451620110781857 53.9542 24. 89 166055401586083681 57.2044 25. 97 49956990469100001 55.4715 26. 101 4108258965739505500 61.8332 27. 103 19316158377073923834001 74.0322 28. 107 386539843111191225 58.4234 29. 109 90550606380841216611 66.2954 30. 113 205142063213188103640 67.4752 31. 127 53234795127882729825 65.5290 32. 131 4114304445616636016032 71.8011 33. 137 124225935845233319439174 76.7173 34. 139 3482435534325338530940 71.5606 35. 149 6418869735252139369210 72.4428 |
|
|
|
![]() |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Not smooth enough numbers | Sam Kennedy | Factoring | 5 | 2012-11-10 07:54 |
| Remove the Smooth 2012 | c10ck3r | Math | 12 | 2012-09-18 12:38 |
| Smooth Numbers | Yamato | Math | 1 | 2005-12-11 11:09 |
| NFS and smooth norm MOD N ? | bonju | Factoring | 9 | 2005-08-26 13:29 |
| Smooth? | Xyzzy | Factoring | 5 | 2004-11-04 18:20 |