![]() |
|
|
#1 |
|
"Mike"
Aug 2002
5·17·97 Posts |
Here are some benchmarks and some save files... Hopefully Xilman will drop in here and explain what needs to be done for this number...
(10^311 - 1 ) / 9 Code:
Digits B1 B1 ms
50 43e6 2319099
55 11e7 5926153
60 26e7 14038577
65 85e7 46068559
70 29e8 158656304
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 | |
|
Bamboozled!
"πΊππ·π·π"
May 2003
Down not across
2×5,393 Posts |
Quote:
I know that ECM has been run to at least the 50-digit level, because I did 57% of the required work and Bruce Dodson did the other 43%. A relatively small amount of work has been done with B1>43M but I'm not entirely sure how much. My guess is the equivalent of a few hundred curves at the p55 level but I'll see if I can discover more. Although I haven't calculated the optimum cut-off point, at least in part because no-one really knows how hard it will be by SNFS, most people seem to think that ECM should be run to at least 55 digits and possibly further. Paul |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
"Nancy"
Aug 2002
Alexandria
2,467 Posts |
From past factoizations I found that usually a reasonable rule of thumb is to test GNFS numbers for factors up to 1/3 the size of the number, and SNFS numbers up to 2/9 of the difficulty. For R311, that would mean ECM up to almost 70 digits, which seems rather a lot and I'm not sure how well this rule of thumb holds up for numbers this large. I'm still pretty sure that ECM well beyond 55 digits is worthwhile, probably even beyond 60.
Alex |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
"Mike"
Aug 2002
5×17×97 Posts |
9 curves with B1=43e6
32 curves with B1=11e7 |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Mar 2003
New Zealand
22058 Posts |
Since the new Prime95 can do numbers of this form I tried it out, but even on a P4, stage one with Prime95 24.6 takes about 15% longer than gmp-ecm 5.0.3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Jul 2004
Potsdam, Germany
3·277 Posts |
Any progress on this number?
I've just noticed that no 55-digit effort has been reported on the 10- tables so far. As this number is a possible (or even likely?) candidate for a kilobit SNFS, I think it should reach a proper ECM level within a year or two... |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
"Mike"
Aug 2002
100000001101012 Posts |
228 curves using B1=11e7 & B2=680270182898...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
May 2003
3·7·11 Posts |
From PZ's ECM records page - slotted in at the #2 of all-time:
digits: 64 f: 4344673058714954477761314793437392900672885445361103905548950933 N: 10^311-1 B1: 85e7 sigma: 1917732841 date: 05 Sep 2005 Finder: K. Aoki & T. Shimoyama Very impressive indeed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
May 2003
3·7·11 Posts |
This forum is broke.
I just got a mail saying: """ Jwb52z has just replied to a thread you have subscribed to entitled - R311... - in the Factoring forum of mersenneforum.org. This thread is located at: http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthr...2&goto=newpost Here is the message that has just been posted: *************** Am I right in assuming that this P64 means that R311 is finished, meaning no more work needs to be done now, and I can report it to Kirk Pearson as such with the P64 being the factor found? *************** """ And there's no such post here?!?!? Anyway - it doesn't matter. Kirk knows. I know he knows, as I was the one who told him. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
"Nancy"
Aug 2002
Alexandria
2,467 Posts |
>This forum is broke.
Nope, Jwb52z deleted his post right after posting it - but at that time, the notification email had been sent already. I can still see his deleted posting, but that may be because I have mod powers... Alex |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Sep 2002
17×47 Posts |
This is my fault guys, I'm sorry. I was checking on the "older" factoring projects that haven't had much done on them in a while and I forgot that Kirk already had the P64 factor listed.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| R311 factored by ECM | xilman | GMP-ECM | 16 | 2005-09-06 23:05 |