mersenneforum.org Aliquot sequences that start on the integer powers n^i
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2022-07-01, 20:54 #1728 gd_barnes     May 2007 Kansas; USA 101011100000112 Posts I terminated 306^62.
2022-07-01, 21:32   #1729
gd_barnes

May 2007
Kansas; USA

3·47·79 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by garambois Bases 20 to 25 to exponent 125 Bases 26 to 30 to exponent 120 Bases 31 to 40 to exponent 110 Bases 288, 338, 385, and 392: exponent 65 Bases 1058, 1152, 1155, and 1250: exponent 55 The above extensions seem to me to be a good compromise : I have changed your proposal a bit. I will make these extensions in a few days.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by gd_barnes Sounds like a great compromise! I look forward to it. It won't be watered down too much if we get them mostly initialized by the end of June, which I plan to do. Bases 20, 21, and 22 are now initialized for all parity exponents <= 160 digits. Bases >= 23 are all initialized for same-parity exponents <= 160 digits. I will continue working my way up for opposite-parity exponents for bases >= 23 and keep you posted.
Jean-Luc,

I have completed many initializations for the newly added base's exponents shown above for all parities. Specifically for bases 20 to 40 I have initialized all exponents that are <= 160 digits. For bases 288, 338, 385, 392, 1058, 1152, 1155, and 1250, I have completed all newly added exponents of all sizes.

I had already completed and you had done full updates for bases 20 thru 23. Here is a detailed list of what I have completed since then:

Base ; exponent range
24; 101 to 115
26; 101 to 113
28; 101 to 110
29; 100 to 109 (Exponent=100 is not an initialization but some quick ECM extended some of them.)
30; 101 to 108
31; 100 to 106
33; 100 to 105
34; 100 to 104
35; 100 to 103
37; 100 to 102
38; 101 to 102 (I went to slightly > 160 digits on bases 38 to 40.)
39; 100 to 102
40; 100 to 102
Bases 288, 338, 385, & 392; 61 to 65 (bases fully initialized)
Bases 1058, 1152, 1155, & 1250; 51 to 55 (bases fully initialized)

Some of these you may have already done full updates last time for them.

My plan is now to continue initializing sequences in this area for bases 20 to 40 that are > 160 digits. There are a lot of them!

For reference: Here is how I initialize sequences where the size is so large: I run ECM/SIQS/NFS until the cofactor is >= 110 digits. All cofactors are ECM'd to t35 unless the optimum is less than that. This provides a good stopping point. Because of the large size, many times this results in adding very few iterations, sometimes as few as 0 or 1.

Gary

Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2022-07-01 at 21:34

 2022-07-02, 09:38 #1730 garambois     "Garambois Jean-Luc" Oct 2011 France 929 Posts Information on the summer works Thank you all for your hard work. I will try to update this weekend. But if I can't, this work will be done after July 8 when I will have much more time, I will then do a general update for all the bases. To simplify, let's say that during the month of July, I'm going to perfect my analysis programs and try to reproduce Edwin's work for prime numbers > 10^9. And also, I will do a lot of testing on small samples to see if some calculations need to be pushed a little further. Of course, I'll let you know if I start to observe things that are not random. I will also use this first half of the summer to try to fix the difficulty to scan FactorDB. Then, on August 15, after a final, very thorough update, I'll launch the big FactoDB scan. It will take maybe 1 or 2 days, I hope not more with all the blockages. Then I'll just have to run my scan programs which will probably run for 1 or 2 days too. Then it will be time to look at the final results. And only then, around August 20-25, will I be able to tell you whether something new will come out of these analyses. I hope so, because we have all worked hard. But we are angling for something and we don't really know if we will find anything. Last year we came up empty-handed. We'll see this year. The main thing is to try, that's the only way we'll find something. Details of the points examined during this summer's analysis : - Redo the works explained in post #1360 with the updated data. - Redo these works with the bases and exponents that are only prime numbers, as my intuition tells me. - Analyze Edwin's results on prime numbers > 10^9. - Crosscheck the data in a different way thanks to new scripts written by Karsten Bonath (thanks a lot to him who works discreetly). - Continue the work initiated two years ago with Edwin on the occurrences of prime numbers in sequences (prime numbers at the end of sequences and also in any term of sequences). - Try to do some work on sequences that end in cycles, but we have very few cycles and this work may still not be possible. - As a reminder, the original purpose of the project is explained in a synthetic way in post #1328. ... ... Other ideas than those planned may arise during the work. Ideas can come from anyone and lead in new directions not originally planned, as has happened very recently with Edwin and many times in the past. If a strange idea pops into your head, if you feel like looking at something in the data, if you feel like you notice something that is not random, you should talk about it here on this forum. No idea will be considered "stupid", even if it is trivial or if someone has had it before on the thread. The thread now has so many pages that it is difficult to remember or read everything before posting. And it is during discussions and sometimes even during misunderstandings that new ideas are born. Last fiddled with by garambois on 2022-07-02 at 09:41 Reason: Small layout corrections.
2022-07-02, 15:53   #1731
Happy5214

"Alexander"
Nov 2008
The Alamo City

33916 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by garambois If I understand correctly, you have initialized the base 306, right ?
Yes.

Quote:
 Originally Posted by gd_barnes I have recently been following up on newly initialized bases by doing additional work on (only) same-parity sequences up to 160 digits. If it's OK with you, I'd like to do that here for those in the 140-160 digit range.
Sorry for the late reply. I don't consider that base reserved, so go right ahead.

Last fiddled with by Happy5214 on 2022-07-02 at 15:53 Reason: Period

2022-07-03, 05:20   #1732
gd_barnes

May 2007
Kansas; USA

1113910 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by gd_barnes Jean-Luc, I have completed many initializations for the newly added base's exponents shown above for all parities. Specifically for bases 20 to 40 I have initialized all exponents that are <= 160 digits. For bases 288, 338, 385, 392, 1058, 1152, 1155, and 1250, I have completed all newly added exponents of all sizes.
Bases 20 thru 30 have now been completely initialized for all recently added exponents all sizes. This only leaves bases 31 thru 40 from the above list of bases that were recently extended, which need to be initialized for exponents > 160 digits. I'm working on those now.

2022-07-03, 10:21   #1733
gd_barnes

May 2007
Kansas; USA

3·47·79 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by gd_barnes Bases 20 thru 30 have now been completely initialized for all recently added exponents all sizes. This only leaves bases 31 thru 40 from the above list of bases that were recently extended, which need to be initialized for exponents > 160 digits. I'm working on those now.
All bases for all parities and sizes have now been completely initialized for all recently added exponents. This includes bases 20 thru 40, 288, 338, 385, 392, 1058, 1152, 1155, and 1250.

 2022-07-03, 15:39 #1734 garambois     "Garambois Jean-Luc" Oct 2011 France 929 Posts Page updated, but only to add 3 bases, nothing more. I didn't have enough time ! Many thanks to all for your help. Added bases : 239, 241 and 306. While waiting for a total update in a few days...
2022-07-03, 21:07   #1735
gd_barnes

May 2007
Kansas; USA

3×47×79 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by gd_barnes I have terminated the following same-parity sequences: 239^53, 239^55, 239^57, 239^63, & 239^67 241^53, 241^55, 241^57, & 241^59
It looks like it was missed that I was the one who terminated these. :-)

 2022-07-04, 17:46 #1736 VBCurtis     "Curtis" Feb 2005 Riverside, CA 10101000011102 Posts I added 1400+ terms to 13^50. It may now be turned pink on the page, at 163 digits and a fully-ECMed C155.
 2022-07-08, 21:16 #1737 gd_barnes     May 2007 Kansas; USA 3×47×79 Posts Yoyo terminated 22^67
2022-07-09, 06:07   #1738
garambois

"Garambois Jean-Luc"
Oct 2011
France

929 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by gd_barnes It looks like it was missed that I was the one who terminated these. :-)
I'm sorry, I must have put the wrong acronym in the last update.
I will fix it in a few days at most.

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post fivemack FactorDB 46 2021-02-21 10:46 schickel FactorDB 18 2013-06-12 16:09 garambois Aliquot Sequences 34 2012-06-10 21:53 Andi47 FactorDB 21 2011-12-29 21:11 schickel mersennewiki 0 2008-12-30 07:07

All times are UTC. The time now is 11:19.

Fri Aug 19 11:19:18 UTC 2022 up 1 day, 8:47, 0 users, load averages: 1.11, 1.00, 1.00