mersenneforum.org Operation: Billion Digits
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

2005-03-07, 21:57   #551
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502

"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

240168 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by ET_ Do you know who worked the first two from 68 to 69?
I used the search function on these forums (note that if you search "3321931099" you won't find "M3321931099").

Aitsen
M3321930371 no factor from 2^60 to 2^69.
http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthr...ht=M3321930371
Joshua2
M3321931099 no factor from 2^67 to 2^69.
http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthr...ht=M3321931099

 2005-03-13, 18:11 #552 VBCurtis     "Curtis" Feb 2005 Riverside, CA 23×3×5×43 Posts Software question Luigi-- Would it be difficult to allow tenths of a bit to be entered for factoring limits? It appears we're all intimidated by the time requirements to factor from 73 to 74 bits, but if (for example) I could divide the work into 2 (or more) pieces, I'd tackle 73 to 73.6 on one machine, 73.6 to 74 on a second machine, and make getting numbers to 74 bits (and thus level 8!) feasible. Can the program be altered easily to accept such entries? Is this more bookkeeping trouble than it's worth? -Curtis
2005-03-13, 19:41   #553
ET_
Banned

"Luigi"
Aug 2002
Team Italia

483810 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by VBCurtis Luigi-- Would it be difficult to allow tenths of a bit to be entered for factoring limits? It appears we're all intimidated by the time requirements to factor from 73 to 74 bits, but if (for example) I could divide the work into 2 (or more) pieces, I'd tackle 73 to 73.6 on one machine, 73.6 to 74 on a second machine, and make getting numbers to 74 bits (and thus level 8!) feasible. Can the program be altered easily to accept such entries? Is this more bookkeeping trouble than it's worth? -Curtis
It's feasible.
I'm just looking for some free time to implement also a couple of improvements, as the time needed for each search and a new sieve to speed up the search.

If you have requests, this is the right time to write them down

Luigi

2005-03-14, 00:21   #554
wblipp

"William"
May 2003
New Haven

23×103 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by ET_ If you have requests, this is the right time to write them down
Luigi,

I've been thinking about trial factoring in other bases, but I don't know if it makes sense to adapt your program. The parameters of interest are pretty far from Operation Billion Digits, so the design choices may make adapation infeasible.

Factors of p^q-1 are either q or 2kq+1. But the exponent q I'm interested in is tiny compared to OBD - usually less than 100 and nearly always less than 1000. On the other hand, the base b of interest can be large compared to "2" - often 10^7 and occasionally 10^150.

William

2005-03-14, 09:53   #555
ET_
Banned

"Luigi"
Aug 2002
Team Italia

2·41·59 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by wblipp Luigi, I've been thinking about trial factoring in other bases, but I don't know if it makes sense to adapt your program. The parameters of interest are pretty far from Operation Billion Digits, so the design choices may make adapation infeasible. Factors of p^q-1 are either q or 2kq+1. But the exponent q I'm interested in is tiny compared to OBD - usually less than 100 and nearly always less than 1000. On the other hand, the base b of interest can be large compared to "2" - often 10^7 and occasionally 10^150. William
It sounds interesting.

Three questions:

1 - May you point me to links with heuristics (like mod reductions to speed up the process)?

2 - Are you sure that programs like LLR, PRP, PFGW, NewPgen don't offer that feature? They are far better optimized and tested.

3 - Are you sure that trial factoring on your numbers would be more efficient than, say, ECM or QS?

Luigi

 2005-03-14, 21:49 #556 Joshua2     Sep 2004 13·41 Posts I only have two requests. Main request is to have it search faster, while still being sure it finds all factors. :) Although, if it was way way faster, it might be worth it to miss some, cause so many more numbers could be searched. Also, I second the request to be able to not have to do whole bits at a time, ie 73.0 to 73.5.
2005-03-15, 04:57   #557
wblipp

"William"
May 2003
New Haven

23×103 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by ET_ Three questions:
Thinking about it some more, this is probably not the way to do this. Trial factoring would not be the method of choice for substantial factors, it would be a fast check for small factors before invoking other methods. And the "p" in the 2kp+1 would be the same set of small p's over and over, so resieving from scratch every time may not be efficient, either.

 2005-10-29, 15:57 #558 Phinne   Oct 2005 1810 Posts New search Hello, I'm totally new to this, and I hope I'll do this right. I'm gonna try the M3321928241 exponent.
2005-10-29, 16:15   #559
ET_
Banned

"Luigi"
Aug 2002
Team Italia

2×41×59 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Phinne Hello, I'm totally new to this, and I hope I'll do this right. I'm gonna try the M3321928241 exponent.
Hi Phinne, welcome aboard.

M3321928241 has been factored up to 73 bits, so if you want to try it you should test it from 73 to 74 bits: it's a long way, maybe more than a week... Are you still interested in it or you want to change to an easier one?

Luigi

 2005-10-29, 20:47 #560 gribozavr     Mar 2005 Internet; Ukraine, Kiev 11·37 Posts I'm going to try new Linux 64-bit binary. I reserve M3321928241.
2005-10-29, 21:07   #561
ET_
Banned

"Luigi"
Aug 2002
Team Italia

12E616 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by gribozavr I'm going to try new Linux 64-bit binary. I reserve M3321928241.
You can reserve it on the checkout thread.

And check your mail as well... it seems that I resolved the segmentation fault problem on 32-bit pentium4 version... at least on my computer.

Luigi

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post aketilander Operation Billion Digits 14 2021-02-27 07:14 a1call Miscellaneous Math 179 2015-11-12 14:59 Oddball Twin Prime Search 370 2013-01-03 21:26 smslca Math 3 2011-04-18 17:18 Unregistered Information & Answers 7 2010-08-12 06:25

All times are UTC. The time now is 10:52.

Wed Jan 26 10:52:53 UTC 2022 up 187 days, 5:21, 0 users, load averages: 1.95, 1.74, 1.50