20100215, 08:03  #1 
Nov 2008
2·3^{3}·43 Posts 
A new driver? (or type of driver?)
2^8 * 7 * 73 is a guide. According to the rules, it is class 4, so it isn't too hard to escape.
However, if you add in a 5, a 19 and a 37 to produce 2^8 * 5 * 7 * 19 * 37 * 73, then the 2^8 keeps the 7 and the 73 there, the 19 keeps the 5 there, the 37 keeps the 19 there and the 73 keeps the 37 there. The main difference is that the new primes raise the power of 2 of the sigma to 8, and other prime factors will raise it to 9 or more, meaning that it will keep the 2^8. As far as I can see, you can only escape this structure when one of the factors in it is squared (like a driver that isn't 2^3 * 3 or the downdriver), but according to Clifford Stern's page (linked above), the guide is just the 2^8 * 7 * 73. The original definition of drivers and guides only allows for drivers formed from factors of the sigma of the power of 2, but clearly other primes can have a huge effect. I apologise if this is incorrect. Last fiddled with by 10metreh on 20100215 at 08:04 
20100215, 12:00  #2 
Account Deleted
"Tim Sorbera"
Aug 2006
San Antonio, TX USA
10267_{8} Posts 
A few experiments on your new "driver": (2^8*5*7*19*37*73 = 459818240)
http://factordb.com/search.php?se=1&...ange&fr=0&to=2 (37^2 at index 1; no 19, and so lost the driver, at index 2) http://factordb.com/search.php?se=1&...nge&fr=0&to=10 (7^2 at index 5; 2^7, and so lost the driver, at index 6) http://factordb.com/search.php?se=1&...ange&fr=0&to=2 (index 1=driver*3^2; 2^9, and so lost the driver, at index 2; it was lost without any of the driver's factors being squared, just that the nondriver cofactor was a square) Doesn't seem to have much staying power. Last fiddled with by TimSorbet on 20100215 at 12:01 
20100215, 14:06  #3 
Nov 2008
2322_{10} Posts 
Of course it's not like ordinary drivers in that it can keep the 2^8 while losing one of its factors, and it doesn't seem to stay for long, it's just the fact that it needs a squared factor to disappear that interests me.

20100215, 15:57  #4 
May 2009
Dedham Massachusetts USA
3×281 Posts 
The main difference is that a square will have a cascade effect in that all those dependent on the square term can be lost. So in MiniGeek's example the 37^2 lost the 19 which will eventually lose the 5 term and the 3 term (which wasn't listed but is based on the 5). Once the 19 is lost it is unlikely to get it back (1/19 every time we have a 37^2 term?)
Since the 37 would be squared every 37 iterations on average (I think), and keeping the 19 isn't very high if we do get a square, the long term stability is much lower than for a true driver. In the shorter term though, it is likely to last 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Possible problems with nVidia 320.18 driver  kladner  GPU Computing  0  20130615 15:33 
Nvidia GPU driver level  Chuck  GPU Computing  11  20120817 20:27 
Aliquot driver article available  schickel  Aliquot Sequences  4  20110629 09:55 
Poll: Which is the worst driver  Greebley  Aliquot Sequences  8  20091024 07:45 
Nvidia driver problem  Sideshow Bob  Software  4  20040213 13:39 