mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > PrimeNet

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2013-11-06, 19:45   #1
ixfd64
Bemusing Prompter
 
ixfd64's Avatar
 
"Danny"
Dec 2002
California

5×11×43 Posts
Default an idea for improving the factor table

I have a few ideas for improving the exponent status table.

To start off, I think it's important to distinguish whether a number has been fully factored or that it merely has known factors. In my opinion, exponents should not be marked as "Factored" unless we know they are fully factored. "Factors known" would probably be a more accurate label, although something as simple as an asterisk would also do. Hell, I think even Dr. Silverman would agree!

Expanding on the idea, it would be helpful if PrimeNet provided the status of the co-factors. I'm thinking about something like the following:

C# - number or co-factor has # digits and is composite
P# - number or co-factor has # digits and is prime
PRP# - number or co-factor has # digits and is a probable prime
U# - number or co-factor has # digits and whose character is unknown

The abbreviations would be used for numbers with more than a certain number of digits.

For example, the table could look something like this (with co-factors with 50 or more digits being abbreviated):

Code:
Exponent | Status | Factors
2 | Prime
3 | Prime
5 | Prime
7 | Prime
11 | Factored | 23, 89
13 | Prime
17 | Prime
19 | Prime
<snip>
983 | Factored | 1808226257914551209964473260866417929207023, P254
991 | Factors known |  8218291649, 41473350001, 231620367206687, C264
997 | Factored | 167560816514084819488737767976263150405095191554732902607, C244
<snip>
2251 | Factored | 400679, 778847, 17620954939878356226435007, 1687942505818611032423917201, P614
2267 | Composite | C683
[LL results]
[P-1 results]
[ECM results, history, etc.]
2269 | Factors known | 5198395892876421104415109549087087419559080537214372111, C629
2273 | Composite | C685
[LL results]
[P-1 results]
[ECM results, history, etc.]
2281 | Prime | P687
<snip>
I know this is what http://factordb.com is for, but not everyone is aware of that site.

What does everyone else think?

Last fiddled with by ixfd64 on 2013-11-06 at 19:50
ixfd64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-11-06, 19:56   #2
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

22×5×373 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ixfd64 View Post
I have a few ideas for improving the exponent status table.


<snip>
I know this is what http://factordb.com is for, but not everyone is aware of that site.

What does everyone else think?
Redundancy can be useful. Just ask the people at the Department of
Redundancy Department.
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-11-06, 20:00   #3
VictordeHolland
 
VictordeHolland's Avatar
 
"Victor de Hollander"
Aug 2011
the Netherlands

23×3×72 Posts
Default

I like your idea, but why not use the same labelling system of factordb for Fully Factored (FF) and Composite Factor Known (CF)?

http://factordb.com/status.html

C: Composite, no factors known
CF: Composite, factors known
FF: Composite, fully factored
P: Definitely prime
PRP: Probably prime
U: Unknown

Last fiddled with by VictordeHolland on 2013-11-06 at 20:02 Reason: link
VictordeHolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-11-07, 18:27   #4
Mark Rose
 
Mark Rose's Avatar
 
"/X\(‘-‘)/X\"
Jan 2013

292910 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ixfd64 View Post
I have a few ideas for improving the exponent status table.


<snip>
I know this is what http://factordb.com is for, but not everyone is aware of that site.

What does everyone else think?
Redundancy can be useful. Just ask the people at the Department of
Redundancy Department.
Mark Rose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-11-07, 23:05   #5
cheesehead
 
cheesehead's Avatar
 
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA

22·3·641 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ixfd64 View Post
I know this is what http://factordb.com is for, but not everyone is aware of that site.

What does everyone else think?
I think it would be much more efficient use of our volunteer time to publicize factordb.com than to duplicate its features in PrimeNet.

How about just adding, to the exponent status display, a little blurb recommending factordb.com for further details about factors?
cheesehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-11-08, 05:41   #6
c10ck3r
 
c10ck3r's Avatar
 
Aug 2010
Kansas

10438 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cheesehead View Post
I think it would be much more efficient use of our volunteer time to publicize factordb.com than to duplicate its features in PrimeNet.

How about just adding, to the exponent status display, a little blurb recommending factordb.com for further details about factors?
What about the limit of 10M digits on FactorDB? Or that fact that most PrimeNet factors are likely not reported on the DB?
c10ck3r is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
improving factorization method bhelmes Computer Science & Computational Number Theory 7 2017-06-26 02:20
Windows 10 in Ubuntu, good idea, bad idea, or...? jasong jasong 8 2017-04-07 00:23
Improving website speed Unregistered Information & Answers 1 2011-04-02 02:17
Improving Sieving by 18%. cipher Prime Sierpinski Project 10 2009-07-01 13:34
Improving the RAM allocation for Prime 95 Matthias C. Noc Software 3 2004-02-12 19:34

All times are UTC. The time now is 10:31.

Thu Mar 4 10:31:28 UTC 2021 up 91 days, 6:42, 1 user, load averages: 1.92, 1.56, 1.62

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.