Python script for search for factors of M1277 using random k-intervals - Page 4

Viliam Furik · 2020-10-19, 22:28

May I ask you to discuss here only the topic of the thread, please?

VBCurtis · 2020-10-19, 22:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Viliam Furik

May I ask you to discuss here only the topic of the thread, please?

The topic of the thread as suggested in the first post is so utterly hopeless that the rest of the discussion is the only useful content. OP's idea was debunked by multiple people, who gave data and probabilities.

storm5510 · 2020-10-19, 23:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Viliam Furik

May I ask you to discuss here only the topic of the thread, please?

This is a discussion about M1277. The OP introduced it. Anything reasonable and relative should go.

The downside to mtee is that everything written to the screen is captured. This can result in many megabytes of text. GMP-ECM places a group of asterisks before any line containing found factor information. This makes for a quick search with something like Notepad++.

xilman · 2020-10-20, 10:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by storm5510

If he was not using it on long runs. Not using it would allow a found factor to roll off the top of the screen as the program continued to run.

A minor workaround would be to use something to capture every line appearing on the screen and writing it into a text file. I believe Linux may have something like this built in. In the past, I have used a little program called mtee. It does the same thing. Then a person would have to do a manual search of each capture file.

I am not sure I follow. "ecm ? factorint" produces an error message.

Edit: I just sent a message to PhilF to see if he was using the -one option in his processes.

Please pay attention.

I specifically wrote in gp.

storm5510 · 2020-10-20, 13:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by xilman

Please pay attention.

I specifically wrote in gp.

Apologies. I am not familiar with gp.

mathwiz · 2020-10-20, 14:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by VBCurtis

The topic of the thread as suggested in the first post is so utterly hopeless that the rest of the discussion is the only useful content. OP's idea was debunked by multiple people, who gave data and probabilities.

Maybe a mod can change the topic to "Python script to needlessly waste energy and compute cycles".

Viliam Furik · 2020-10-20, 15:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by mathwiz

Maybe a mod can change the topic to "Python script to needlessly waste energy and compute cycles".

That's not nice of you...

mathwiz · 2020-10-20, 16:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Viliam Furik

That's not nice of you...

Perhaps a bit snarky, but is the topic of this thread "general efforts to factor M1277" or just the original Python script? If the latter, then wasting energy and compute is all that would be accomplished.

LaurV · 2020-10-21, 07:18

For fun, I just timed factor5 (the old version from 2009, I don't have newer) and it is about few thousand times faster compared with the script (slow laptop, 6 threads in 2 cores to feed the cpu 100%, P95 running in background, i.e. doing nothing due to priority limit, computer still normally responsive).

Edit: that was for fun! TF on this exponent is totally pointless. Unless you consider yourself extremely lucky guy (like we Romanians would say, you stepped on a shit or put your hand in it, or one shit fell on your head, or something).

storm5510 · 2020-10-21, 16:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaurV

For fun, I just timed factor5 (the old version from 2009, I don't have newer) and it is about few thousand times faster compared with the script (slow laptop, 6 threads in 2 cores to feed the cpu 100%, P95 running in background, i.e. doing nothing due to priority limit, computer still normally responsive).

I believe M1277 has been factored to 2^67. I have both the old and the new factor5 here somewhere. The new doesn't know from 2^? It uses k only. Somewhere in my notebook I keep, there is a conversion formula I scratched down a long time ago. Someone here presented the formula. Who or when, I cannot remember.

After doing a little searching in my notes, I believe I found it. It looks like so: k = 2^x / 2p. The x would be replaced with 67 then 68. 2p is 2*1277. If this is correct, the lower k would be 57,781,500,622,426,160, and the upper is 115,563,001,244,852,320. I do not believe it multi-threads, so it could take decades, if not centuries, to run.

I found the archive. It is attached below if anyone wants to mess with it. It produces a results file, but no interim screen output. Luigi Morelli wrote this in 2018. I believe many here know who Luigi is.

LaurV · 2020-10-21, 16:56

This is (as the readme says) the version optimized for large p and small k. It is too slow for small p, and would not worth anyhow, even if the TF would be indicated (but as I said, and everybody said, it is NOT! Don't waste your time with TF).

I downloaded it and deleted it without launch (why the exe only, and not the sources? - rhetoric question, no need answer).

2020-10-21, 07:18	#42
LaurV Romulan Interpreter Jun 2011 Thailand 23CA₁₆ Posts	For fun, I just timed factor5 (the old version from 2009, I don't have newer) and it is about few thousand times faster compared with the script (slow laptop, 6 threads in 2 cores to feed the cpu 100%, P95 running in background, i.e. doing nothing due to priority limit, computer still normally responsive). Edit: that was for fun! TF on this exponent is totally pointless. Unless you consider yourself extremely lucky guy (like we Romanians would say, you stepped on a shit or put your hand in it, or one shit fell on your head, or something). Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2020-10-21 at 07:23

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
inconsistent timestamp intervals in prime.log	ixfd64	Software	1	2020-11-01 20:27
Could I run this py python script on a supercomputer?	Ghost	Information & Answers	4	2018-11-30 04:07
M1277 - no factors below 2^65?	DanielBamberger	Data	17	2018-01-28 04:21
search for MMM127 small factors?	Orgasmic Troll	Miscellaneous Math	7	2006-06-11 15:38
Random numbers and proper factors	mfgoode	Math	20	2006-02-05 02:09

2020-10-19, 22:28	#34
Viliam Furik "Viliam Furík" Jul 2018 Martin, Slovakia 101010000₂ Posts	May I ask you to discuss here only the topic of the thread, please?

2020-10-21, 16:56	#44
LaurV Romulan Interpreter Jun 2011 Thailand 10001111001010₂ Posts	This is (as the readme says) the version optimized for large p and small k. It is too slow for small p, and would not worth anyhow, even if the TF would be indicated (but as I said, and everybody said, it is NOT! Don't waste your time with TF). I downloaded it and deleted it without launch (why the exe only, and not the sources? - rhetoric question, no need answer).