20200322, 13:14  #1772 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
3368_{10} Posts 
3+2,620 (GNFS)
Code:
30016614534509185538267643811098950235950800577843553215914188199521848201 13314606811334378236794012712692141063589808880388357960397353852726553013022276102779033601 
20200322, 13:21  #1773 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
2^{3}×421 Posts 
9+2,586M (GNFS)
Code:
22892248823338312080292806210051631753143696127735096749122777071527433 40814275681048767532336611399735131346712766890469860126480620490503136016233128328129 
20200323, 06:42  #1774 
Mar 2020
2^{2} Posts 
12 + 3,331?
http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000001473043132
Code:
12^331+3^331<358> = 3^331 · 5 · 589181 · 432655397 · 51861618869<11> · 1780051652040095043377<22> · 1095236138...33<60> · 1484943149...77<94> 
20200323, 14:11  #1775  
Aug 2005
Seattle, WA
2^{5}·7^{2} Posts 
Quote:
12^331 + 3^331 = 3^331(4^331 + 1) = 3^331(2^662 + 1) So the only part of it which is interesting is 2^662 + 1, which is a standard Cunningham number. It can be found in the 2LM table here. 

20200326, 14:28  #1776 
Jun 2012
2×5×7×41 Posts 
I presume 8+3_320 (C175) is best factored with GNFS, correct? The quartic SNFS is difficulty 231 which will be slow to sieve I think.
Anybody want 97_269 (GNFS 167) or should I grab it for NFS@Home? 
20200326, 17:07  #1777  
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
2^{3}·421 Posts 
Quote:
But all this might be a while and it's dependent on how 6+5,370 finishes. I kind of expect it to move to LA tomorrow, even though CADONFS will be checking later today for a "good enough" matrix. When CADONFS says, it is OK, I'll actually be trying to shift to msieve LA, which will free up the CADONFS "farm" for the next run. All that said, if you want any of the smaller ones that are there or show up, go ahead and grab them. I'll see what's available at the time I'm ready to get something and reserve it then. 

20200326, 20:21  #1778  
Aug 2005
Seattle, WA
2^{5}·7^{2} Posts 
Quote:
I suspect 8+3,320 would also be substantially faster by GNFS. 

20200326, 20:34  #1779 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
2^{3}×421 Posts 
You are probably quite right about it being longer, which is why I'm testing it. At just over two days into sieving, I have just passed 100M relations. But I don't know how close I am to a workable matrix, or how much the relations found will taper off. My computing power is antique  several i7's and i5's.

20200326, 22:17  #1780  
Jun 2012
B36_{16} Posts 
Quote:
I can start poly searching 8+3_320 later tonight unless Ed wants it. 

20200326, 23:26  #1781  
Aug 2005
Seattle, WA
2^{5}·7^{2} Posts 
Quote:


20200326, 23:43  #1782  
Nov 2003
2^{6}·113 Posts 
Quote:
should have a much bigger base and LP bound. [for quartics]. 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
New phi for homogeneous Cunningham numbers  wpolly  Factoring  26  20160729 04:34 
Mathematics of Cunningham Numbers (3rd ed., 2002, A.M.S.)  Xyzzy  Cunningham Tables  42  20140402 18:31 
Don't know how to work on Cunningham numbers.  jasong  GMPECM  6  20060630 08:51 
Doing Cunningham numbers but messed up.  jasong  Factoring  1  20060403 17:18 
Need help factoring Cunningham numbers  jasong  Factoring  27  20060321 02:47 