mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Factoring

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2021-06-14, 14:28   #265
Max0526
 
"Max"
Jun 2016
Toronto

3A116 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsquared View Post
I'm pushing toward a t60 on the c198 from line 128. Assuming the number survives that, I'll ask for a spun poly for the c198.
I will start spinning ahead of time and will do my absolute best to get you a very good poly. So far the best increase in E was 29%. I suspect it's not the limit yet.
Max0526 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-06-14, 15:02   #266
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

23×3×5×47 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsquared View Post
It looks like it is asking for 1992616 additional raw input relations, which is only 7% more than the 27M you've already gathered. I don't know if it accounts for the expected 40% duplication rate in that figure or not...
CADO's calculation asks for "output" relations = uniques, and then estimates how many "input" relations = raw will be needed to get that many uniques.

Bur is learning what happens when too-small parameter choices are made. I believe this job will finish, but it won't be pretty. You're correct to believe the remaining effort is less time than starting over, but now you know that a 20% complete job isn't so much sunk cost that starting over is out of the question.
VBCurtis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-06-14, 16:54   #267
bsquared
 
bsquared's Avatar
 
"Ben"
Feb 2007

1110100101012 Posts
Default

I'm running a t35 on all of the unbooked composties in unhighlighted rows 158, 160, and 168-172. This is good experience for avx-ecm.

So far (I will update as things progress):
Code:
(10,-5)
c168 = p47*c123

(10,-7)
c282 = p26*c256
c288 = p11*c277

(5,-10)
c283 = p27*p32*p34*p35*c157

(4,-10)
c277 (#1) = p19*p17*p28*p34*c181
c277 (#2) = p22*p28*c229

(3,-10)
c265 = p14*prp251

(2,-10)
c231 = p24*c207
c249 = p15*p23*c212

(1,-10)
c184 = p36*c149
c235 = p28*prp207
So far no complete factorizations but (10,-5) now has an easy c123 that I am not reserving.

Last fiddled with by bsquared on 2021-06-14 at 17:35 Reason: more results
bsquared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-06-14, 17:06   #268
Max0526
 
"Max"
Jun 2016
Toronto

3A116 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsquared View Post
I'm running a t35 on all of the unbooked composties in unhighlighted rows 158, 160, and 168-172. This is good experience for avx-ecm.

So far (I will update as things progress):
Code:
(10,-5)
c168 = p47*c123

(10,-7)
c282 = p26*c256
c288 = p11*c277

(5,-10)
c283 = p27*p32*p34*p35*c157

(4,-10)
c277 (#1) = p19*p17*p28*p34*c181
c277 (#2) = p22*p28*c229
So far no complete factorizations but (10,-5) now has an easy c123 that I am not reserving.
I removed the highlight from lines 161 and 163. It was yellow just to show that the composites in bold were shared by different points.
So lines 161 and 163 are free to take for ECM as well, if you wish.

Last fiddled with by Max0526 on 2021-06-14 at 17:10
Max0526 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-06-14, 17:39   #269
bsquared
 
bsquared's Avatar
 
"Ben"
Feb 2007

3,733 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max0526 View Post
I removed the highlight from lines 161 and 163. It was yellow just to show that the composites in bold were shared by different points.
So lines 161 and 163 are free to take for ECM as well, if you wish.
Done with the t35's in my previous post. Line 161 has already survived t50, so I'll skip that for now. Now running a t35 on the 5 unreserved composites of line 163.

results:
Code:
(10,-10)
c208 = p39*c169
c401 = p30*c372
Done with t35 on 5 composites on line 163.

Last fiddled with by bsquared on 2021-06-14 at 18:17 Reason: more results
bsquared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-06-14, 17:41   #270
bur
 
bur's Avatar
 
Aug 2020
79*6581e-4;3*2539e-3

10100100112 Posts
Default

If it's unique relations, then it's only missing 1.2e6 more, which is about 2e6 relations. I'm not sure if that estimate is correct anyway, since this is the 7th or so round of filtering. ETA is in 7 hours, so I'll know tomorrow morning.


VBCurtis, you're right, but is it certain the other parameters would have turned out better? They asked for 65e6 relations, which would be faster at the rels/q rate from test-sieving but only if it wouldn't turn out to be an underestimation as well.

Is there any way to prevent this underestimation of required relations from happening? Test filtering?

Actually, it would be interesting to compeltely re-run this number using different parameters. Some other time though, currently the office is a sauna with the weather and the CPU. So I'll have to move the computer to an AC'ed room first as soon as this factorization finishes... ;)

Last fiddled with by bur on 2021-06-14 at 17:42
bur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-06-14, 17:52   #271
charybdis
 
charybdis's Avatar
 
Apr 2020

11101000012 Posts
Default

bur - watch that "excess" figure which pops up each time filtering runs; it was -1183116 in the log entry that you posted. That number should get smaller and smaller (in absolute value) until it turns positive, at which point filtering should succeed unless required_excess is nonzero. Keeping track of the excess will give you some idea of how much longer you'll need to sieve.
charybdis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-06-14, 19:36   #272
swishzzz
 
Jan 2012
Toronto, Canada

1408 Posts
Default

I've added a few more entries into factordb which are not currently on the Google Sheet. This is around the limit of numbers I can completely factor given the resources on my single Lenovo Ideapad 5 without causing performance issues for my other apps. General rule of thumb here is size of number ~ SNFS difficulty * 12.

(12, 5): http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000002606861040 (2421 digits)
(12, 4): http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000002606860637 (2289 digits)
(12, 3): http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000002606859937 (2216 digits)
(12, 2): http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000002606859288 (2197 digits)
(12, 1): http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000002606857749 (2223 digits)
(12, 0): http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000002606855673 (2310 digits)
(12, -1): http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000002606856356 (2439 digits)
swishzzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-06-14, 19:41   #273
bsquared
 
bsquared's Avatar
 
"Ben"
Feb 2007

3,733 Posts
Default

Advancing to t40 on unreserved composites on lines 158,160,163, and 167-172

Progress:
Code:
(10,-7)
c256 = p38*c219

(5,-10)
c157 = p36*p50*p73
Now done: all ecm'ed to t40 with 1 partial and 1 complete factorization.

Last fiddled with by bsquared on 2021-06-15 at 17:40 Reason: more results
bsquared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-06-14, 21:02   #274
swishzzz
 
Jan 2012
Toronto, Canada

25·3 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by swishzzz View Post
I've added a few more entries into factordb which are not currently on the Google Sheet. This is around the limit of numbers I can completely factor given the resources on my single Lenovo Ideapad 5 without causing performance issues for my other apps. General rule of thumb here is size of number ~ SNFS difficulty * 12.

(12, 5): http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000002606861040 (2421 digits)
(12, 4): http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000002606860637 (2289 digits)
(12, 3): http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000002606859937 (2216 digits)
(12, 2): http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000002606859288 (2197 digits)
(12, 1): http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000002606857749 (2223 digits)
(12, 0): http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000002606855673 (2310 digits)
(12, -1): http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000002606856356 (2439 digits)
Finished light ecm on all these (t25 or so):

(12, 5): c156, c169
(12, 4): c170, c173, c177
(12, 3): c130, c180
(12, 2): c121, c143
(12, 1): c125
(12, 0): c168, c174, c175
(12, -1): c121, c179, c190
swishzzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-06-14, 21:54   #275
Max0526
 
"Max"
Jun 2016
Toronto

929 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsquared View Post
I'm pushing toward a t60 on the c198 from line 128. Assuming the number survives that, I'll ask for a spun poly for the c198.
c198 spun poly vs original polys. Because the two spun polys are close, and coming from different connected elliptic curves, it may be smart to test-sieve to decide which one to pick.
Code:
n: 442480456268307355970377486465969784979730470279409306982158698829691328120816007497057176155135483213248563103903861494465722951888948657031409779919681670455655411204200835023769409621132838744169

SPUN:
Line 4 : {'c4': '1', 'c3': '0', 'c2': '2', 'c1': '-12', 'c0': '10', 'y1': '3105317578628153423506739578983437982692791417722955507', 'y0': '1783785732675759131389551214804762300612349559114245473'}
Skew, Murphy E:
1.16292 2.41372557e-13

Line 25 : {'c4': '2', 'c3': '2', 'c2': '1', 'c1': '4', 'c0': '8', 'y1': '1195009498251726830929240449280801910673701770687009936', 'y0': '-6033442123246363595737194920672615397495021982445825621'}
Skew, Murphy E:
2.2025 2.37771575e-13
----------------------
BEST ORIGINAL:
Line 2 : {'c4': '2', 'c3': '-30', 'c2': '169', 'c1': '-420', 'c0': '392', 'y1': '1195009498251726830929240449280801910673701770687009936', 'y0': '-10813480116253270919454156717795823040189829065193865365'}
Skew, Murphy E:
4.9201 2.03968529e-13

Line 7 : {'c4': '1', 'c3': '-24', 'c2': '288', 'c1': '-4320', 'c0': '32400', 'y1': '220255307658732382019531394029779280346740309768118339', 'y0': '-15526587893140767117533697894917189913463957088614777535'}
Skew, Murphy E:
20.63567 1.77637452e-13
bsquared, are they detailed enough for you, or you need me to recreate them in a standard column format? Here the coefficients are c4,c3,c2,c1,c0,Y1,Y0; n is at the top.
Max0526 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
factoring 2ⁿ-2 equivalent to factoring 2ⁿ-1(I think) baih Miscellaneous Math 9 2020-09-21 07:11
OpenCL GPU P-1 Factoring and ECM Factoring xx005fs GPU Computing 3 2018-10-27 14:49

All times are UTC. The time now is 05:18.


Mon Feb 6 05:18:18 UTC 2023 up 172 days, 2:46, 1 user, load averages: 0.84, 1.21, 1.17

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, 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.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎𝜍 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔