Thinking out loud about getting under 20M unfactored exponents

[ZacHFX]

While working through 12.2M, found two factors in the 69-70 range on 12243883. Not quite a unicorn, but what are the odds of this happening? Somewhere around 1/70/70?

[Viliam Furik]

Originally Posted by ZacHFX

While working through 12.2M, found two factors in the 69-70 range on 12243883. Not quite a unicorn, but what are the odds of this happening? Somewhere around 1/70/70?

This happened to me maybe 10 times (maybe more) already. Probability, I'd say you are in the correct range with 1/4900.

[Viliam Furik]

Originally Posted by Viliam Furik

This happened to me maybe 10 times (maybe more) already. Probability, I'd say you are in the correct range with 1/4900.

Even today... 10026343

Now that's a really improbable coincidence.

[tuckerkao]

So it's still possible to find 2 factors within the same bit of the same exponent. How about 3?

Originally Posted by Viliam Furik

Even today... 10026343

Now that's a really improbable coincidence.

Since GPU72 recommended the TF up to 2^68, wondering why the user who ran the PRP-CF didn't check beforehand?

Glad I checked 2^67 to 2^68 of M11196881, so I had nearly no chance of missing 2 factors at once, but UncWilly still thought I made the mistake despite no additional factors were found by Team_Inspector afterwards.

[LaurV]

Can we move few factors from the 11.8M to the 11.9M?

We already found 96 factors for 11.8M (94 needed) and there is about 28% more to go from the range (like about 20 or more factors expected). (James' site and Chris' "twok table" didn't catch up with it yet, but the range is done). We don't know if we should finish all the range just to satisfy personal OCD, or move to a new range and save the time. Advice?

Maybe split the GPUs and let one or two working in 11.8, and move the others to 11.4?

Anyhow, "twok" will catch up soon, and there will be only 203 ranges to go. Or 202, as I see the people working in 41M only need a factor or two to get rid of that range too.

[Viliam Furik]

Originally Posted by tuckerkao

So it's still possible to find 2 factors within the same bit of the same exponent. How about 3?

Sure, why not. Just let us know when you find one (or three, to be exact).

Originally Posted by tuckerkao

Since GPU72 recommended the TF up to 2^68, wondering why the user who ran the PRP-CF didn't check beforehand?

You do realize, that people doing PRP-CF do lots of them per day continuously, right? In order to do this, they would have to not only do PRP-CF, but also TF on them. That's more than double the work.

People usually (heck, almost never) pick a specific exponent (or type of exponent) to work on. Only you and few others do.

Originally Posted by tuckerkao

Glad I checked 2^67 to 2^68 of M11196881, so I had nearly no chance of missing 2 factors at once, but UncWilly still thought I made the mistake despite no additional factors were found by Team_Inspector afterwards.

This may be a bit of a shocker for you, but Uncwilly is Team_Inspector!

(I hope Uncwilly won't get mad at me for this...)

[axn]

Originally Posted by LaurV

move to a new range and save the time. Advice?

Move on. There is enough work in twok.

[masser]

Originally Posted by LaurV

We don't know if we should finish all the range just to satisfy personal OCD, or move to a new range and save the time. Advice?

Move on. Leave some low-hanging fruit for the searchers that follow after the twok project.

[tuckerkao]

Originally Posted by Viliam Furik

You do realize, that people doing PRP-CF do lots of them per day continuously, right? In order to do this, they would have to not only do PRP-CF, but also TF on them. That's more than double the work.

People usually (heck, almost never) pick a specific exponent (or type of exponent) to work on. Only you and few others do.

This may be a bit of a shocker for you, but Uncwilly is Team_Inpsector!

(I hope Uncwilly won't get mad at me for this...)

I indeed hand-picked M11196881 a while ago. I thought the only possible bit that could find at least 1 new factor was 2^67 to 2^68 for this particular number, so I only finished TF of that bit. At least Team_Inspector went in and I passed his inspection despite around an obvious 25% chance of failure.

Most of the PRP-CF only took 3 hours on my PC, so it wasn't a big deal even if a factor was missing.

[axn]

If TJAOI's results are to be trusted, there are no new factors < 2^67 to be found in GIMPS range (p < 1e9)

[LaurV]

Originally Posted by Viliam Furik

This may be a bit of a shocker for you, but Uncwilly is Team_Inpsector! (sic)

No way! I don't believe that
(and, yeah, he will get mad at you, but not for disclosure, for butchering the name, it sounds like an insect, kind of wasp? hihi )

(edit: "thinking out loud" about deleting the posts of tk which are not related, he doesn't contribute anything to this project, but doesn't miss an opportunity to brag bout his base twelve and intelligent selection method, methink we shouldn't give him the chance to spread the dirt in this thread too)