![]() |
![]() |
#1156 | |
Apr 2006
1638 Posts |
![]() Quote:
as in -SIZE mode. The list would just contain the prime 5. Then use " -U 5 1 " to branch only on the component 5^1. The most recent version of the program is from 2014 and has no further optimizations, only additional modes for the results in the other 2 papers with Michael (on the radical of an OPN and the bound Omega >= 2*omega+51). And yes, to get beyond 10^1735, I just added 23 at the end of the list 127, 19,..,17. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#1157 | |
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Liverpool (GMT/BST)
11000010001002 Posts |
![]() Quote:
Are you able to share this version of the code? The -Y option that you mentioned in 2021 would be useful as it allows more exact branching than the version I have does. At least one of the roadblock circumventions you mentioned in your run to 2200 needed this. I will add 23 onto the end of my future runs. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#1158 | |
Apr 2006
5·23 Posts |
![]() Quote:
The factor 5^1 contributes to the abundancy at each step. No branching on p^1 for p > 5. No branching on 5^k for k > 1. The latest version: https://www.lirmm.fr/~ochem/opn/p42n.cpp |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#1159 |
Aug 2022
China
61 Posts |
![]()
More factors / remaining ~t35 composites.
Probably going to try c151~c160. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#1160 |
Jan 2009
Bilbao, Spain
2×3×53 Posts |
![]()
More factors with t40.
Last fiddled with by mataje on 2023-06-09 at 13:22 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#1161 | |
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Liverpool (GMT/BST)
22×1,553 Posts |
![]() Quote:
To get -U 5 1 working I had to add 5 to the list of forbidden factors for the COMPS switch. This is normally empty. On the third attempt I had a successful run to 130(2 and then 1 composites from first 2 runs). I will push further. I expect there will be more composites that will limit pushing too much further without sustained effort. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#1162 |
Jan 2009
Bilbao, Spain
2×3×53 Posts |
![]()
More factors.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#1163 | |
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
53·113 Posts |
![]() Quote:
I expect to be away from my computer 20-22 June for the world series of poker, so I'll run filtering on the 23rd to see where we are. Yield on the nfs@home half of the job is about 8% lower than my test-sieve suggested- it looks like 450M relations rather than the ~480M I projected. Should we sieve those extra 30-40M relations locally, meaning run until the 24th, or should we add 10MQ to the sieve request at nfs@home? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#1164 | |
Jun 2012
FF016 Posts |
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#1165 |
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
53×113 Posts |
![]()
I second your motion. Since you're a gatekeeper on nfs@home, please add 10MQ to the sieve range.
That'll put us around 480-490M rels from nfs@home; I think we'll need 910-940M total, so the 450M we have planned locally should be plenty. I'm pleased that the problems we had with database crashes on the 2330L job back in 2019 have been fixed; there have been no reboots of the cado-server package during this job. I'm game to host future such hybrid CADO / nfs@home jobs in the future, particularly ones on the large end of 15e or small end of 16e. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#1166 | |
Jun 2012
77608 Posts |
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
![]() |
||||
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 |