mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Factoring

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2018-07-28, 12:37   #694
MisterBitcoin
 
MisterBitcoin's Avatar
 
"Nuri, the dragon :P"
Jul 2016
Good old Germany

14508 Posts
Default

I have started YAFU on p^11-1 with digit size 112. I dont have an exact number (yet); but it´s about 940 numbers.

Most of them seem to have small factors, which should speed thinks up a bit. I can also take other numbers (e.g. p^19-1 (about ~1000 number with 112 digits)) after I´m finished with 112 digits.

One number takes about 6200 seconds NFS plus 2150 seconds for ECM. So far I had bad luck; 4 out of 5 had to be done with NFS, the last had an 26 digits factor. Co-Factor factored with SIQS.


I have no idea how long it will take, with ~6-8 numbers/day it will take ~130 days.
MisterBitcoin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-07-28, 13:11   #695
R. Gerbicz
 
R. Gerbicz's Avatar
 
"Robert Gerbicz"
Oct 2005
Hungary

5C516 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterBitcoin View Post
I have started YAFU on p^11-1 with digit size 112. I dont have an exact number (yet); but it´s about 940 numbers.
Just interestingly (for amateurs and experts) what SNFS polynom are you using for these?
R. Gerbicz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-07-28, 14:23   #696
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

25·151 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterBitcoin View Post
One number takes about 6200 seconds NFS plus 2150 seconds for ECM. So far I had bad luck; 4 out of 5 had to be done with NFS,
I'm pretty sure you'll get more finished per day if you cut your ECM effort in half.
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-07-28, 15:51   #697
MisterBitcoin
 
MisterBitcoin's Avatar
 
"Nuri, the dragon :P"
Jul 2016
Good old Germany

11001010002 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by R. Gerbicz View Post
Just interestingly (for amateurs and experts) what SNFS polynom are you using for these?

I´m using the polys found by YAFU. They have scores about e 8.415e-010.
YAFU´s poly search runs about 14 Minutes; while factmsieve.py only searches for ~3 minutes.
BUT: Booth gave me similar score values.

The poly instructions I got from RichD doesn´t seem to work. (probably due to "layer 8" problem ) The poly I got from RichD for that C118 needed only 2,4M Relations; the msieve/Yafu polys need 7,65M Relations for lattice sieving. Looks like there is the problem.
Cutting pretest effort will help for sure.
MisterBitcoin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-07-28, 18:27   #698
R. Gerbicz
 
R. Gerbicz's Avatar
 
"Robert Gerbicz"
Oct 2005
Hungary

7×211 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterBitcoin View Post
I´m using the polys found by YAFU. They have scores about e 8.415e-010.
If the unfactored part is still "large" then doing this with Gnfs is a major overshoot, since these are
simply special numbers.
Asked this because when you check out such a number, say:
http://www.factordb.com/index.php?qu...844986229-1%29
(the given number is not interesting, just random)
and when you click on more information then there is an available option to get
Code:
Auto-generated SNFS-Polynominal available!
you could think that it is optimal, but it is very far from that, lets see:

Code:
n=(p^11-1)/(p-1);

f(x)=p*x^5-1;
m=p*p;
f(m)%n
so it is used a degree 5 polynom, but not used the known factor (p-1).
It was totally unable to recognize that it is a reciprocial polynomial, and we can get:

Code:
g(y)=y^5+y^4-4*y^3-3*y^2+3*y+1;
M=lift(Mod(p+1/p,n));
g(M)%n


? ? ? ? %25 = 0
? ? ? ? ? %28 = 0
(so both polynomial is valid.)

After this writing searched the web, and found this:
http://www.mersennewiki.org/index.ph...mial_Selection
explaining the same thing.
R. Gerbicz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-07-30, 17:32   #699
Brownfox
 
Brownfox's Avatar
 
Dec 2017

26 Posts
Default

All most wanted numbers with SNFS difficulty below 180 digits now done.



Now working on 6217^47-1 and 1091^59-1



As a matter of interest, is there any sort of target or score to work towards for the OPN bounds proofs? How many factor-weights might we need to allow the proof that there is no OPN with less than 2100 digits, for example?


Thanks
Steve
Brownfox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-08-02, 08:50   #700
henryzz
Just call me Henry
 
henryzz's Avatar
 
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)

587610 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brownfox View Post
All most wanted numbers with SNFS difficulty below 180 digits now done.



Now working on 6217^47-1 and 1091^59-1



As a matter of interest, is there any sort of target or score to work towards for the OPN bounds proofs? How many factor-weights might we need to allow the proof that there is no OPN with less than 2100 digits, for example?


Thanks
Steve
I believe it is proven upto 2100 digits. The effort here is to reduce the difficulty to prove that and larger.
henryzz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-08-10, 12:06   #701
MisterBitcoin
 
MisterBitcoin's Avatar
 
"Nuri, the dragon :P"
Jul 2016
Good old Germany

14508 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterBitcoin View Post
I have started YAFU on p^11-1 with digit size 112. I dont have an exact number (yet); but it´s about 940 numbers.

Most of them seem to have small factors, which should speed thinks up a bit. I can also take other numbers (e.g. p^19-1 (about ~1000 number with 112 digits)) after I´m finished with 112 digits.

One number takes about 6200 seconds NFS plus 2150 seconds for ECM. So far I had bad luck; 4 out of 5 had to be done with NFS, the last had an 26 digits factor. Co-Factor factored with SIQS.


I have no idea how long it will take, with ~6-8 numbers/day it will take ~130 days.

Quick notice:
I have stopped this effort and moved the processing power on somethink more usefull.

Soon I´ll have 4 numbers ready for SNFS with size 165 digits; they all passed pretest t40; excluding one that also survived 6600 curves@43M.

These numbers have the form p^11-1; let me know if I should post them here or elswhere.

I can also do any other form, send me an file with numbers that need pretest and suggested deeph and I´ll do them.
MisterBitcoin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-08-10, 14:46   #702
MisterBitcoin
 
MisterBitcoin's Avatar
 
"Nuri, the dragon :P"
Jul 2016
Good old Germany

80810 Posts
Default

It´s down to three numbers. (165 digits; form p^11-1)

These two reached t40:
http://www.factordb.com/index.php?id...00001076092952
http://www.factordb.com/index.php?id...00001076093749

This reached t50:
http://www.factordb.com/index.php?id...00001076094174


I´m willing to do ECM pretests for any digit size <1200 digits from this project. Just send me the numbers via PM.
MisterBitcoin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-08-10, 17:40   #703
RichD
 
RichD's Avatar
 
Sep 2008
Kansas

3,361 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterBitcoin View Post
I'll take these three. More or less to finish them off so the ECM effort is not lost and possibly duplicated.
RichD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2018-08-12, 02:06   #704
RichD
 
RichD's Avatar
 
Sep 2008
Kansas

3,361 Posts
Default MWRB file

Reserving the following numbers from the MWRB file.
Code:
1103^61-1
1129^61-1
1249^61-1
1783^61-1
1867^61-1
RichD is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Passive Pascal Xyzzy GPU Computing 1 2017-05-17 20:22
Tesla P100 — 5.4 DP TeraFLOPS — Pascal Mark Rose GPU Computing 52 2016-07-02 12:11
Nvidia Pascal, a third of DP firejuggler GPU Computing 12 2016-02-23 06:55
Calculating perfect numbers in Pascal Elhueno Homework Help 5 2008-06-12 16:37
Factorization attempt to a c163 - a new Odd Perfect Number roadblock jchein1 Factoring 30 2005-05-30 14:43

All times are UTC. The time now is 00:18.

Thu Jun 17 00:18:44 UTC 2021 up 19 days, 22:05, 0 users, load averages: 1.01, 1.40, 1.60

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.