mersenneforum.org  

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2007-07-22, 10:36   #1
S485122
 
S485122's Avatar
 
Sep 2006
Brussels, Belgium

63E16 Posts
Default How far to do trial factoring

In a discussion on how far trial factoring should go, there has been a suggestion concerning the fact that some numbers are better candidates for P-1 than others. This should be determined at the start of trial factoring in order to chose to how many bits a Mersenne number should be trial factored, at that time only the exponent of the Mersenne number is known. But in that discussion I am not sure whether one speaks about the factors or the exponents. If one can, indeed, not try some potential factors that would be certain to be found by P-1, how does it relate to how far one does trial factoring ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by akruppa View Post
How about making the thresholds depend on p (mod 120)? For example, for candidate factors p==1 (mod 120), we know that 120|p-1, giving P-1 a much higher chance of recovering such factors if missed by trial division. Otoh, with p==119 (mod 120), p-1 has no prime factors <5 except a single 2, so these are poor candidates for P-1 and could be trial divided higher.
...
Alex :akruppa:
Quote:
Originally Posted by axn1 View Post
Why not go all the way, and eliminate smooth p-1's from TF altogether? Using some additional sieving, smooth p's could be quickly identified and eliminated, resulting in 30% fewer candidates to be checked by TF (of course, all of this assumes that P-1 will be run without fail after TF).
Cfr thread New factoring breakeven points coming.

This thread could be in maths, software of factoring instead of primenet...

Jacob
S485122 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-09-06, 00:52   #2
Mr. P-1
 
Mr. P-1's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

7·167 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by S485122 View Post
In a discussion on how far trial factoring should go, there has been a suggestion concerning the fact that some numbers are better candidates for P-1 than others. This should be determined at the start of trial factoring in order to chose to how many bits a Mersenne number should be trial factored, at that time only the exponent of the Mersenne number is known. But in that discussion I am not sure whether one speaks about the factors or the exponents.
Alex's post wasn't very clear, but it only makes sense if it is interpretted as referring to candidate factors, not exponents.

Quote:
If one can, indeed, not try some potential factors that would be certain to be found by P-1, how does it relate to how far one does trial factoring ?
From what Alex said (and I've spent some time thinking about this too, and reached much the same conclusion) it's impractical or impossible to efficiently exclude potential factors certain to be found by P-1. Alex's idea was to exclude some potential factors which are more likely to be found by P-1.

Similarly one could include more of those potential factors which are less likely to be found by P-1.
Mr. P-1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Trial Factoring on AMD/ATI GPU's? Stargate38 GPU Computing 9 2018-08-31 07:58
What is Trial Factoring? Unregistered Information & Answers 5 2012-08-02 03:47
How much Trial Factoring to do? odin Software 4 2010-08-08 20:23
How to only do Trial Factoring? michael Software 23 2004-01-06 08:54
About trial factoring gbvalor Math 4 2003-05-22 02:04

All times are UTC. The time now is 12:05.

Tue Dec 1 12:05:55 UTC 2020 up 82 days, 9:16, 1 user, load averages: 2.25, 2.26, 2.17

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.