Reserved for MF - Sequence 4788 - Page 44

Mini-Geek · 2009-10-12, 14:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by bsquared

It survived 800 curves at 110M (B2 = 776278396540) done last night. Anyone have a complete ECM curve count? Where are we now?

43M:
jrk: 2000 curves done
Greebley: started a run of 1956 ecm curves (100/day, started 5 days ago, approx. 500 done)
Andi47: 1712 curves done
bsquared: 4000 curves

110M:
bsquared: 800 curves

total: about 8212 curves @ B1=43M and 800 curves @ B1=110M. 10metreh said the last one had about 8000 at 43M, so that should be plenty for that B1. Do we need more at 110M or should we begin poly search? Maybe someone will be able to use their GPU to find a poly super fast. http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=12562

henryzz · 2009-10-12, 16:50

judging by the evidence i would start gnfs now especially if we can poly select on a GPU

henryzz · 2009-10-12, 18:13

BTW if people think that 4788 is getting too large and slow or that it would be nice to process a smaller sequence* together at the same time

*i would suggest one that is in the top 10 for length but not size

Greebley · 2009-10-13, 14:17

522 attempts at 43M with nothing found. I stopped it since it sounds like we are up to the poly part.

The standard msieve -v -np <num> would be 300 hours which seems too long compared to faster methods.

bsquared · 2009-10-13, 14:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by henryzz

BTW if people think that 4788 is getting too large and slow ...

Maybe we should set a stopping point for this sequence. 160 digits, or iteration 2460 (whichever comes first) or something...

bsquared · 2009-10-13, 14:40

I don't have access to a gpu with CUDA :( But I started poly selection on 0-10000 using pol51*.

fivemack · 2009-10-13, 15:08

My GPU with CUDA is arriving on Thursday

Greebley · 2009-10-13, 15:45

I was thinking it would be neat to get 314718 to index 9000, however it is at 8902 now so that would be a long 92 indices more.
It is index 2540 for 4788.

Mini-Geek · 2009-10-13, 15:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greebley

I was thinking it would be neat to get 314718 to index 9000, however it is at 8902 now so that would be a long 92 indices more

Might be too difficult for now, but maybe we should try to get a sequence to index 10000.

10metreh · 2009-10-13, 16:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by bsquared

Maybe we should set a stopping point for this sequence. 160 digits, or iteration 2460 (whichever comes first) or something...

160 digits? We passed that a while ago.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greebley

I was thinking it would be neat to get 314718 to index 9000, however it is at 8902 now so that would be a long 92 indices more.
It is index 2540 for 4788.

Both those figures are wrong: 314718 is at index 8908, and 4788 is at index 2448.

bsquared · 2009-10-13, 16:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by 10metreh

160 digits? We passed that a while ago.

170 digits, then, sorry. Just thought it might be worthwhile to have a goal to work towards...

2009-10-13, 15:45	#481
Greebley May 2009 Dedham Massachusetts USA 3×281 Posts	I was thinking it would be neat to get 314718 to index 9000, however it is at 8902 now so that would be a long 92 indices more. It is index 2540 for 4788. Last fiddled with by Greebley on 2009-10-13 at 15:49

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Reserved for MF - Sequence 3366	RichD	Aliquot Sequences	470	2021-04-22 02:17
Reserved for MF - Sequence 3408	RichD	Aliquot Sequences	474	2021-03-07 20:28
Reserved for MF - Sequence 276	kar_bon	Aliquot Sequences	127	2020-12-17 10:05
Assignments are reserved but not showing up	prism019	GPU to 72	6	2020-09-21 22:11
80M to 64 bits ... but not really reserved	petrw1	Lone Mersenne Hunters	82	2010-01-11 01:57

2009-10-12, 16:50	#475
henryzz Just call me Henry "David" Sep 2007 Cambridge (GMT/BST) 7·29² Posts	judging by the evidence i would start gnfs now especially if we can poly select on a GPU

2009-10-12, 18:13	#476
henryzz Just call me Henry "David" Sep 2007 Cambridge (GMT/BST) 16FF₁₆ Posts	BTW if people think that 4788 is getting too large and slow or that it would be nice to process a smaller sequence* together at the same time *i would suggest one that is in the top 10 for length but not size

2009-10-13, 14:17	#477
Greebley May 2009 Dedham Massachusetts USA 3·281 Posts	522 attempts at 43M with nothing found. I stopped it since it sounds like we are up to the poly part. The standard msieve -v -np <num> would be 300 hours which seems too long compared to faster methods.

2009-10-13, 14:40	#479
bsquared "Ben" Feb 2007 2·3·587 Posts	I don't have access to a gpu with CUDA :( But I started poly selection on 0-10000 using pol51*.

2009-10-13, 15:08	#480
fivemack (loop (#_fork)) Feb 2006 Cambridge, England 2³×11×73 Posts	My GPU with CUDA is arriving on Thursday