mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Lone Mersenne Hunters

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2011-01-13, 11:44   #56
ET_
Banned
 
ET_'s Avatar
 
"Luigi"
Aug 2002
Team Italia

2×2,383 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by axn View Post
Huh? It used to be that, once upon a time, p95 used to go ahead with TF even if a factor was found, just to make sure that no _smaller_ factor was missed. Then, that was removed. You mean to say that this (mis)feature has been reintroduced?!

I'm afraid I followed the wrong chain of answers.
The old behavior was removed.

The actual Prime95 should finish its bit range even if a factor is found.

Luigi
ET_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-13, 15:39   #57
lorgix
 
lorgix's Avatar
 
Sep 2010
Scandinavia

26716 Posts
Default

Which raises my question, again.

Why multiply them?

Isn't that sort of the opposite of what we're trying to do here?
lorgix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-13, 22:26   #58
petrw1
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
 
petrw1's Avatar
 
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada

2·11·199 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alpertron View Post
My computer found the following results:

M120247 has a factor: 3250729890896242123679136285673
Some work effort quantification trivia complements of:
http://mersenne-aries.sili.net/credi...tton=Calculate

Finding the same factor via TF would take over 8.5 quadrillion GhzDays

petrw1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-13, 22:40   #59
cheesehead
 
cheesehead's Avatar
 
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA

22×3×641 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lorgix View Post
Which raises my question, again.

Why multiply them?
Exactly which ones are you referring to, and which procedure found them? Perhaps there's some mixup.

TF doesn't multiply them. (I've seen TF report two found factors from a single run; it did so on separate "has a factor" lines, not presented as the product of the two.)

P-1, by its nature, may find the product of two smaller factors at the conclusion of its GCD, rather than finding the two separately. Isn't that the method involved in the case you reference?

Quote:
Isn't that sort of the opposite of what we're trying to do here?

Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2011-01-13 at 22:45
cheesehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-13, 22:52   #60
lorgix
 
lorgix's Avatar
 
Sep 2010
Scandinavia

3×5×41 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cheesehead View Post
Exactly which ones are you referring to, and which procedure found them? Perhaps there's some mixup.
Post #46.

Quote:
TF doesn't multiply them. (I've seen TF report two found factors from a single run; it did so on separate "has a factor" lines, not presented as the product of the two.)
That's what I'd expect. Hence the question; why multiply?

Quote:
P-1, by its nature, may find the product of two smaller factors at the conclusion of its GCD, rather than finding the two separately. Isn't that the method involved in the case you reference?
No, as you know by now; he claims it was found by TF. In post #51 I wrote that I thought it would have stopped after finding the smaller one. But that I wouldn't at all be surprised to see that factor found by P-1.
lorgix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-14, 12:59   #61
drh
 
drh's Avatar
 
Jan 2011
Cincinnati, OH

1448 Posts
Default

This is my largest factor so far-

52526609 has a factor: 156325851414571040867100443817329068296081239222450719

Found by P-1
drh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-14, 13:50   #62
lorgix
 
lorgix's Avatar
 
Sep 2010
Scandinavia

3·5·41 Posts
Default

That's a composite; p24*p30. Still, nice find!
lorgix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-15, 10:28   #63
Mr. P-1
 
Mr. P-1's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

22218 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mini-Geek View Post
These "k=2" you are talking about are really k=1. Factors are of the form 2kp+1. In other words, they're mp+1, with m always even. With these factors, m=2 and k=1, since the factor is equal to 2*p+1.
I'd bet that the factors of the k's break down, on average, like the factors of any natural number of about their size. And that the chance of any given k producing a factor is related to the equation given at http://www.mersenne.org/various/math.php: "(how_far_factored-1) / (exponent times Euler's constant (0.577...))".
That's probably the case for other k. However it is a theorem that if p is a prime congruent to 3 (mod 4) then 2p+1 divides Mp iff 2p+1 is prime. This must affect the statistics.

I'm not aware of any comparable theorem for other k.
Mr. P-1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-15, 10:30   #64
Mr. P-1
 
Mr. P-1's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

7×167 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lorgix View Post
That's a composite; p24*p30. Still, nice find!
Yes. I tend to view composite factors as two factors, rather than as a big factor. Still a P30 is not to be sniffed at
Mr. P-1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-15, 10:45   #65
Mr. P-1
 
Mr. P-1's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

22218 Posts
Default

M39375727 has a factor: 13698938687421045884119517033
M42516611 has a factor: 124316222847533124840651137

The second half of last year was really poor for me. I got no factors at all between 8 August and 26 November. Then three in December, and these two-in-a-row this month.

M39787039 has a factor: 1700513525404800279754718890351

A nice p31 found back in February last year.

Last fiddled with by Mr. P-1 on 2011-01-15 at 10:48
Mr. P-1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-01-15, 16:03   #66
drh
 
drh's Avatar
 
Jan 2011
Cincinnati, OH

22×52 Posts
Default

I also agree that we should view composite factors as two smaller ones. Here is my 2nd largest one, also found by P-1:

M51443083 has a factor: 25320591696138535897675469195834877349466521

I'm also assuming that this is composite since it is so large. I'm still very new at this, and learning. Can you tell me what you are doing, or using to tell if these numbers are composite or not?

Also, maybe I'm getting more than my share, but I've been doing P-1 work for 18 months now, and I've found 24 factors in 331 tests, at about a 7.25% rate.

Thanks,
Doug
drh is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Turn off GCC sse-using optimizations? ewmayer Programming 3 2016-09-30 07:15
AMD goes inane jasong jasong 18 2013-11-15 22:54
When I run PRIME95, my computer threatens to turn off Rafael Information & Answers 12 2012-01-02 19:38
A fond farewell rogue Lounge 10 2008-11-21 05:25
turn off your integrated Snd card in CMOS nngs Hardware 0 2005-05-20 01:31

All times are UTC. The time now is 14:09.

Sun Sep 20 14:09:56 UTC 2020 up 10 days, 11:20, 1 user, load averages: 3.02, 2.05, 1.65

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.