20161216, 21:55  #1 
May 2010
Prime hunting commission.
2^{4}×3×5×7 Posts 
ecm thing
I haven't been here for a while, and I couldn't find much of anything on this by searching it up, so here goes:
is there a nice way to calc the odds of finding an ndigit factor after running a curve at a certain b1? 
20161216, 22:04  #2 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
1000011011010_{2} Posts 
Do you mean specifically n digits, like "what are my chances of finding specifically a 48 digit factor if I run this curve?", or do you mean less than or equal to n digits?
Note your odds depend more on the amount of previous ECM done than they do on the specific bounds of the curve you plan to run, unless your planned bound is vastly larger than previous ECM efforts. For instance, running a single curve at B1 = 3e6 has a nice chance to find a 25 digit factor, if no ECM has previously been run; but if a t35 has already been completed that same curve's chance to find a 25 digit factor is nil. 
20161216, 22:35  #3  
May 2010
Prime hunting commission.
3220_{8} Posts 
Quote:
to clarify, it would be very nice if there were a way to get the odds of an ndigit factor being found after an amount of curves at a certain b1 (e.g. odds of finding a p_{35} factor after 100 curves at b1=5e6) Last fiddled with by 3.14159 on 20161216 at 22:36 

20161216, 23:58  #4 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
2·3·719 Posts 
You should start with "odds this composite *has* a 35digit factor." Absent any knowledge of the number's special form, that's about 1/n, so 1/35 in this case.
Then, given there is such a factor to find, and *no* previous ECM attempts, you could calculate your odds of finding the factor after a certain number of curves. That's roughly (11/e^(z/y)), where z is the number of curves you plan to run and y is the expected number of curves required to discover a factor of that specific size. yvalues are freely available for each n divisible by 5; if you wish to run nonstandard B1 bounds, invoking gmpecm with "v" flag will print the expected curve counts. I am not 100% certain about the above formula; I have used it in the past when z is of the same order of magnitude of y (say, 2000 curves when 4400 is the expected number of curves), but I believe it's an approximation when z is a few hundred or more that isn't quite accurate if you're running a very small number of curves. EDIT: Note that previous ECM failures alter the first probability it is less likely a factor of the desired size exists when ECM has already been run. Calculating this probability is left as an exercise for the reader. Last fiddled with by VBCurtis on 20161217 at 00:00 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
A next big thing  jasonp  Operation Kibibit  23  20120828 12:46 
my thing  firejuggler  Aliquot Sequences  1  20100531 06:57 
Very strange thing  nngs  Software  4  20070414 22:08 
Hm... strange thing...  Yxine  Factoring  1  20060810 13:48 
Can not be a good thing :(  SB2  3*2^n1 Search  7  20040923 08:48 