P-1 factoring anyone?

[Mr. P-1]

Originally Posted by Dubslow

So you're saying that in T=S^(z*k)[sup]e-1[/sup]
e=4,6,12 (or whatever we see in the results line) and
z=30,210,2310 ?

Very nearly. In fact T=S^(z*k)[sup]e-y^e[/sup]

Where z is one of 30, 210, 2310
and y loops over all the positive integers < z/2 which are relatively prime to z.

Then e would have to be even, otherwise you can't factor the square out...

Yes, e must be even.

[Mr. P-1]

Originally Posted by James Heinrich

Indeed, sorry. I think I've got them all now. Not perfectly pretty, but hopefully no longer incorrect.

This is wrong:

Prime95 uses 30 (6#), 210 (10#), or 2310 (12#) (depending upon the available memory) and will be noted in the results.txt output in the form E=4, E=6, or E=12 respectively.

It makes more sense to think of the primorial as 5#, 7#, or 11#, i.e., the product of the first 3, 4, or 5 prime numbers. This quantity is not related to the E parameter recorded in the results file.

All in all the article looks really badly written.

[James Heinrich]

Originally Posted by Mr. P-1

This is wrong:
All in all the article looks really badly written.

Wrong part removed.

Feel free to apply for a wiki account and rewrite the article.

[James Heinrich]

Originally Posted by James Heinrich

To list those exponents (that I've found so far) in one place for easy reference:

Found one more (bold), but this time in another range:
M6,802,123, M6,853,937, M6,853,967, M6,854,297, M6,888,719, M6,935,129, M6,937,501, M8,855,257

[chalsall]

Hey all...

This is a request for more P-1 fire power over at GPU to 72 ("Not just for GPUs any more").

The system currently has 736 low candidates which have been trial factored to 72 "bits". These are awaiting P-1 work before being released back to PrimeNet for LL assignment.

If we don't get some more P-1 workers, we're going to have to start releasing them back to PrimeNet, where they may not get the optimal P-1 attention.

Thanks.

[garo]

I'm giving her all she's got, Captain!

[kladner]

I'll put a few more in queue. It will be a bit before I can give it another worker.

[Bdot]

Originally Posted by James Heinrich

Found one more (bold), but this time in another range:
M6,802,123, M6,853,937, M6,853,967, M6,854,297, M6,888,719, M6,935,129, M6,937,501, M8,855,257

Is there a way to find out which program was used previously (probably prime95), and which version? So that the old version could be run again to see if it really does not find the factor?
Then, the next step would be to find out when the program was changed to fix P-1, and then rerun all older NF-PM1 results ...

[James Heinrich]

Originally Posted by Bdot

Is there a way to find out which program was used previously (probably prime95), and which version?

Very unlikely. Unless there's some old log files lying around (which I doubt) that information wasn't captured back then. If even the date was recorded that would be a start, but that's unknown from back then.


As for GPU-to-72 P-1, I should be able to throw a new system at it by the end of the week.

[davieddy]

Originally Posted by garo

I'm giving her all she's got, Captain!

I shall return.

[henryzz]

Doesn't p-1 stage 2 use ffts. Surely they stand a chance of errors just like ll tests.