mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Operation Billion Digits

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2005-03-07, 21:57   #551
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

20E716 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ET_
Do you know who worked the first two from 68 to 69?
I used the search function on these forums (note that if you search "3321931099" you won't find "M3321931099").

Aitsen
M3321930371 no factor from 2^60 to 2^69.
http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthr...ht=M3321930371
Joshua2
M3321931099 no factor from 2^67 to 2^69.
http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthr...ht=M3321931099

Uncwilly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-03-13, 18:11   #552
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

4,243 Posts
Default Software question

Luigi--
Would it be difficult to allow tenths of a bit to be entered for factoring limits? It appears we're all intimidated by the time requirements to factor from 73 to 74 bits, but if (for example) I could divide the work into 2 (or more) pieces, I'd tackle 73 to 73.6 on one machine, 73.6 to 74 on a second machine, and make getting numbers to 74 bits (and thus level 8!) feasible.

Can the program be altered easily to accept such entries? Is this more bookkeeping trouble than it's worth?
-Curtis
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-03-13, 19:41   #553
ET_
Banned
 
ET_'s Avatar
 
"Luigi"
Aug 2002
Team Italia

10010100110112 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis
Luigi--
Would it be difficult to allow tenths of a bit to be entered for factoring limits? It appears we're all intimidated by the time requirements to factor from 73 to 74 bits, but if (for example) I could divide the work into 2 (or more) pieces, I'd tackle 73 to 73.6 on one machine, 73.6 to 74 on a second machine, and make getting numbers to 74 bits (and thus level 8!) feasible.

Can the program be altered easily to accept such entries? Is this more bookkeeping trouble than it's worth?
-Curtis
It's feasible.
I'm just looking for some free time to implement also a couple of improvements, as the time needed for each search and a new sieve to speed up the search.

If you have requests, this is the right time to write them down

Luigi
ET_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-03-14, 00:21   #554
wblipp
 
wblipp's Avatar
 
"William"
May 2003
New Haven

2×32×131 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ET_
If you have requests, this is the right time to write them down
Luigi,

I've been thinking about trial factoring in other bases, but I don't know if it makes sense to adapt your program. The parameters of interest are pretty far from Operation Billion Digits, so the design choices may make adapation infeasible.

Factors of p^q-1 are either q or 2kq+1. But the exponent q I'm interested in is tiny compared to OBD - usually less than 100 and nearly always less than 1000. On the other hand, the base b of interest can be large compared to "2" - often 10^7 and occasionally 10^150.

William
wblipp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-03-14, 09:53   #555
ET_
Banned
 
ET_'s Avatar
 
"Luigi"
Aug 2002
Team Italia

11×433 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wblipp
Luigi,

I've been thinking about trial factoring in other bases, but I don't know if it makes sense to adapt your program. The parameters of interest are pretty far from Operation Billion Digits, so the design choices may make adapation infeasible.

Factors of p^q-1 are either q or 2kq+1. But the exponent q I'm interested in is tiny compared to OBD - usually less than 100 and nearly always less than 1000. On the other hand, the base b of interest can be large compared to "2" - often 10^7 and occasionally 10^150.

William
It sounds interesting.

Three questions:

1 - May you point me to links with heuristics (like mod reductions to speed up the process)?

2 - Are you sure that programs like LLR, PRP, PFGW, NewPgen don't offer that feature? They are far better optimized and tested.

3 - Are you sure that trial factoring on your numbers would be more efficient than, say, ECM or QS?

If the answer is "yes" for all questions, I will gladly start a new project to help your search

Luigi
ET_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-03-14, 21:49   #556
Joshua2
 
Joshua2's Avatar
 
Sep 2004

10000101012 Posts
Default

I only have two requests.
Main request is to have it search faster, while still being sure it finds all factors. :)
Although, if it was way way faster, it might be worth it to miss some, cause so many more numbers could be searched.

Also, I second the request to be able to not have to do whole bits at a time, ie 73.0 to 73.5.
Joshua2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-03-15, 04:57   #557
wblipp
 
wblipp's Avatar
 
"William"
May 2003
New Haven

2·32·131 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ET_
Three questions:
Thinking about it some more, this is probably not the way to do this. Trial factoring would not be the method of choice for substantial factors, it would be a fast check for small factors before invoking other methods. And the "p" in the 2kp+1 would be the same set of small p's over and over, so resieving from scratch every time may not be efficient, either.
wblipp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-10-29, 15:57   #558
Phinne
 
Oct 2005

2·32 Posts
Default New search

Hello,
I'm totally new to this, and I hope I'll do this right. I'm gonna try the M3321928241 exponent.
Phinne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-10-29, 16:15   #559
ET_
Banned
 
ET_'s Avatar
 
"Luigi"
Aug 2002
Team Italia

11·433 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phinne
Hello,
I'm totally new to this, and I hope I'll do this right. I'm gonna try the M3321928241 exponent.
Hi Phinne, welcome aboard.

M3321928241 has been factored up to 73 bits, so if you want to try it you should test it from 73 to 74 bits: it's a long way, maybe more than a week... Are you still interested in it or you want to change to an easier one?

Luigi
ET_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-10-29, 20:47   #560
gribozavr
 
gribozavr's Avatar
 
Mar 2005
Internet; Ukraine, Kiev

11·37 Posts
Default

I'm going to try new Linux 64-bit binary. I reserve M3321928241.
gribozavr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-10-29, 21:07   #561
ET_
Banned
 
ET_'s Avatar
 
"Luigi"
Aug 2002
Team Italia

476310 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gribozavr
I'm going to try new Linux 64-bit binary. I reserve M3321928241.
You can reserve it on the checkout thread.

And check your mail as well... it seems that I resolved the segmentation fault problem on 32-bit pentium4 version... at least on my computer.

Luigi
ET_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The "one billion minus 999,994,000" digits prime number a1call Miscellaneous Math 179 2015-11-12 14:59
Ten Billion Digits Mersenne Numbers aketilander Operation Billion Digits 13 2013-02-03 21:15
Operation Megabit Twin Oddball Twin Prime Search 370 2013-01-03 21:26
modulo operation for polynomials? smslca Math 3 2011-04-18 17:18
question range 1 billion to 2 billion? Unregistered Information & Answers 7 2010-08-12 06:25

All times are UTC. The time now is 11:41.

Thu Aug 13 11:41:07 UTC 2020 up 8:16, 0 users, load averages: 1.21, 1.19, 1.21

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.