20220914, 20:36  #837 
"Gary"
May 2007
Overland Park, KS
2·3·11·179 Posts 
Ed,
I've decided that I want to ECM all of what is remaining of our sameparity exponents / doublesquare bases. This would only involve exponents at starting size > 185 digits. Previously I only went up to 185 digits. So I'll be asking about some reservations on high exponents before I get started. Are you done with base 98? It doesn't look like it's had any work in a few months. If you'd still like to keep it, would you be OK with me running ECM to t35 on them? As high as they are assuming that you have not ECM'd everything, most would probably not advance and the ones that do would only likely add a few iterations. This would also ECM a handful of the ones reserved for Curtis here that are at starting size > 185 digits. I'm thinking this is OK because sequences that have had no ECM run on them would not be good tests for his process. You or he can let me know your thoughts on that. I'm looking forward to this one. Ever since I've gotten the automated wget and aliqueit processes set up, I can just zoom through these high sequences ECMing everything to t35 while also running aliquiet.exe and adding iterations without having to babysit them. That was the whole point in getting aliquet.exe running without Yafu. That process is what I've been using on the oppositeparity effort for all bases higher exponents that I've had going in the other thread. It's been great! Gary 
20220914, 20:53  #838  
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
2×3^{2}×313 Posts 
Quote:


20220914, 21:01  #839  
"Gary"
May 2007
Overland Park, KS
2×3×11×179 Posts 
Quote:
You had requested a steady supply of factors in the 138147 digit range in post 683 so Ed said he'd feed you a steady supply of them in post 684. You did a few of them. Let us know if you are done with them. It's not necessary that you finish them. They are low priority due to their size. Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20220914 at 21:02 

20220914, 21:42  #840 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
146F_{16} Posts 
@Gary: I was thinking of releasing those left in base 98, myself, since they are larger than I'm currently working with  done.
@Curtis: Are you still interested in a stream of a certain range? Should we come up with some new? We can clear things and start fresh. 
20220914, 22:32  #841 
"Gary"
May 2007
Overland Park, KS
2×3×11×179 Posts 
OK I will plan on going ahead with base 98. Most of these will be a quick runthru similar to the oppositeparities.
This will eventually amount to all exponents on the project having "some" work done on them by someone. I plan to start on Thursday or Friday. 
20220915, 03:12  #842 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
1602_{16} Posts 
I'm solving a couple of NFS matrices this week, and the aliquot sequences I'm working are currently providing me C140C150 composites. So, I'm good for a couple weeks.
I did an extensive testsieve on a C142 with CADO's las, like 40 params settings. I now have yield and speed data for a variety of mfb settings, and need to combine that data with the estimates I've recorded for number of relations. I've learned that mfb and lambda settings are really hard to test because the number of relations required for the job changes too, so sec/rel is an illusion. I've also learned that ncurves doesn't need to be very big, and I=14 is clearly faster than I=13 at c142. The good news is that I can test 3LP at all the sizes I suspect may be useful. My plan is to find likely fastest 2LP and 3LP settings from C150 to C165, and run full jobs comparing those two options working up from the bottom until I find one where 3LP is a winner. As I get into the C160s, I expect to have duelling params settings for you to test on full jobs on your farm. 
20220915, 03:17  #843 
"Gary"
May 2007
Overland Park, KS
27046_{8} Posts 
So from our perspective, we can release anything that we previously had reserved in the C138147 range? Is that correct? I just don't want to step on any toes with my ECM effort coming up in the next few days.

20220915, 03:41  #844 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
2·3^{2}·313 Posts 
Gary
Definitely. I'm not actively working on the list y'all posted for my benefit. I'm still willing to crack something in the C140s to help along your efforts, but nothing needs to be left for my benefit. 
20220915, 19:16  #845 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
5,231 Posts 

20220917, 13:05  #846 
"Gary"
May 2007
Overland Park, KS
2·3·11·179 Posts 
FactorDB just came back up in the last hour. I have a huge amount of data to enter both for same and oppositeparity sequences but will not be able to do that until early Sunday morning.
I have just enough time to enter my 3 sameparity terminations for sequences starting at > 185 digits here before signing off: 137^87, 139^89, and 191^83 terminate 137^87 was fun. It terminated at index=4 with a P179! This is a personal record. I believe it is the 3rd largest ever found on the project. Rich found a P183 for 197^83 at index=2 and Yoyo found a P182 for 200^79 at index=1. I can still say that I've found the largest one on any sequence for index > 2. :) Work is still ongoing on the > 185digit effort. Right now, there looks like there might be only 1 or 2 more interesting sequences that could possibly terminate but no guarantee. But when everything is entered, all sameparity exponents / doublesquare bases on the project will have had open sequences ECM'd to at least t35. Ed, give me until later Sunday night to have all of them searched to C>131. Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20220917 at 13:08 
20220917, 14:12  #847  
"Garambois JeanLuc"
Oct 2011
France
23·47 Posts 
Quote:
Let's wait until the following week for the update. 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Unexpected termination of PM1  Miszka  Software  22  20211119 21:36 
Easier pi(x) approximation  mathPuzzles  Math  8  20170504 10:58 
Would finding a definate Pi value easier if...  xtreme2k  Math  34  20130909 23:54 
Aliquot Termination Question  Largest Prime?  EdH  Aliquot Sequences  6  20100406 00:12 
A new termination below 100k  10metreh  Aliquot Sequences  0  20100311 18:24 