20090812, 13:44  #23  
Jun 2005
lehigh.edu
2^{10} Posts 
Quote:
entry for Cunningham Tables: http://homes.cerias.purdue.edu/~ssw/cun/ the link to "Page 112 (the latest page)" brings up http://homes.cerias.purdue.edu/~ssw/cun/page112 for which the current last entry Code:
5737 6, 304+ c216 693346929436160407667161921820423929978381970938958936441952882745560041213921. p138 Batalov+Dodson snfs 5737th factor in the Updates he maintains for the Cunningham tables. Under "old pages" one finds the first factor, from the first page, which appears to date from "August 1, 1981". Bruce Last fiddled with by bdodson on 20090812 at 14:00 Reason: count refers to Sam's list, the tables themselves date back to the 1920's iirc. 

20090812, 14:30  #24  
Mar 2006
Germany
3^{3}·107 Posts 
Quote:
and the table in post #1 has not to be updated with C's and remaining composites (except the difficulties). the ECMefforts could also be stored at the numbers in the FactoringDatabase! 

20090813, 15:42  #25  
Jun 2005
lehigh.edu
2^{10} Posts 
Quote:
factorization (already updated by Serge). There seem to be a lot (compared to the other 17 Cunningham lists?) of small numbers, six numbers under c180. Some snfs's; worst case gnfs's also in our current range. By contrast, the last 57 are above current msieve range. Might hope to drop one or two by ecm? On storing ECMefforts, you're aware that each of the post #1s were prepared by Garo (following earlier attempts from Bob and Rogue) at trying to record the Lehigh curve counts, c. summer 2005? It may be somewhat easier now, as the most recent cunningham.in from the ECMNET quick_start page is down to just 600 numbers. I've included a recent update among replies posted here, with counts corresponding to 7*t50, 4*t50, 3*t50, 2*t50 and 1.5*t50, depending upon size/digits (for all but the c190c233's, which were subdivided at snfs difficulty 250 (with 4*t50 below, 3*t50 above)). Almost all of these are either with B1 = 110e6 or B1 = 260e6, but translated into t50 = "tested to finding a given p50 to 62% probabilty", which might mean something like 3133 p55optimal curves, B1 = 110e6 and 1579 p60optimal curves, B1 = 260e6. (So these "t50" are the analog of pentium90 years, for ECMNET rather than GIMPS.) You'd need to have a very good reason for adding a fourth version of the Cunningham status (Sam's pages; PaulZ's ECMNET pages and these Garo/Rogue tables, as maintained by Alex and Serge). bd ps  In particular, Cunninghams have been removed from the Database ecm server, as having already been tested past the current target range there Last fiddled with by bdodson on 20090813 at 15:46 Reason: ps on reason 

20090813, 16:30  #26  
Mar 2007
Germany
2^{3}·3·11 Posts 
Quote:
The Database is much more comfortable than the tables from Paul. Sure it`s a lot of work to update all Numbers in the Database  but if all the Numbers are in the Database it will save a lot of time and no factor will be overlooked/lost. IMHO its a logic consequence to use the Database. Regards Andi_HB 

20090814, 03:50  #27  
Jun 2005
lehigh.edu
400_{16} Posts 
Quote:
"homogeneous" Cunninghams; they're different (and not in this thread). As noted in my reply that you skipped over in your followup to kar_bon's post, there's reason to be careful here, since my friend and (on a different project) coauthor PaulZ _does_ have a repository for Cunningham info. I'm also somewhat puzzled about your concern on having (Cunningham?) factors "overlooked/lost", as my first reply to kar_bon (the earlier post) carefully recorded that the current standard for "factoring databases" has been maintained since 1981. Can we agree to resume this discussion five years from now, to see which database has been more reliably maintained over time? I have no dispute with your logic in starting the mersenneforum factoring database. But when I click on the link in kar_bon's post, I find that the first entry has composite cofactor ... uhm, well, I see first digits; and then another click to get a formula for the cofactor. The main focus of the entry appears to be the known prime factors. But what I want to know about 6, 314+ is specific info on that remaining composite factor; the one we're giving our attention to in attempting to complete the factorization. I want to know whether it is a candidate for gnfs; or instead whether it's better by snfs. That would be the purpose of including snfs difficulty, recorded in the new format Batalov has been introducing in posts here in the "Cunningham Tables" forum. More specifically, I'm interested to know how the runtime for snfs compares with the runtime for gnfs; which is the purpose of the Serge ratio, which is now being included in some of the tables. Depending upon how that analysis turns out, I'm supposed to consider additional ecm efforts before starting sieving; or else declare that the cofactor is ready for sieving, and reserve further attention to the other composites in the tables. So again, you're more than welcome to include our factors in your database; not that you need an invitation. But I hope you'll observe that we have somewhat more specific data requirements than what you'd include in a general purpose database. I'm doing my best not to interpret your posts as suggesting that we'd be better off focussing on your interests, rather than the ones related specifically to factoring Cunningham numbers. I do know that there's a subthread on the forum factoring database. I'm even happy to have a pointer to how one accesses Cunningham numbers there. Perhaps with some further experience I might move consulting the database up from it's current standing as fourth among the four places one might consult for info on Cunningham numbers. At the moment, if I'm in need of the known prime factors of a Cunningham, I'm most likely to scroll down Sam's appendix A (the "main tables"). Takes more than one click, and some experience with the scrolling. Can't say for certain that I'd recommend anyone else to start there; but your reply doesn't make the correct comparison. Regards, Bruce PS  you did say "tables" in the reference to Paul(?). There's a "file" on Paul_Z's link "candidates"; namely c120355, but that seems unlikely to be what you meant. I can find prime factors there, but only because I have a copy of the (very) old appendix C used in ordering the entries. The ECMNET database I'm referring to applies only to ecm factors of Cunninghams, and is found on the quick_start page. It's also not the most likely place to look for prime factors, as it features the performance of gmpecm over time. Again, different specific info than what's in the forum database. PPS  perhaps I'm neglecting my main reason for prefering Sam's pages, Paul_Z's list(s) and the format here in the "Cunningham Tables" threads  the prime factors are attributed to the person that found/reported them, with a date and method used. Yet another special interest Last fiddled with by bdodson on 20090814 at 04:20 Reason: added PS/PPS 

20090814, 05:15  #28 
Mar 2007
Germany
2^{3}·3·11 Posts 
First sorry that i have mixed homogeneous Cunningham & Cunningham Numbers.
Hmm maybe i was to fast with my answer and decision for the Database. I understand that for the Cunningham Numbers some more specific Informations are necessary like the ecm effort and the difference snfs/gnfs. The last month i have updatet a lot of numbers with different kinds and noticed that the Database is a good place to bring all the great projects sites under one hat. But i don`t mean the project sites are needless. Regards Andi_HB 
20090814, 06:22  #29 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2
2^{2}·7·337 Posts 
Well, just having a link to Markus' FactorDB will not hurt anyone, but let's not forget a simple fact that FactorDB was seeded with the Cunnigham tables (not any other way around). Both FactorDB and this thread messages are secondary and may at any time be terribly out of date to the real database of Prof.Wagstaff (and his pages).
I'll try to make a simple oneliner to every header which will state the obvious and provide a link or two... 2+ and 2 pages have overlap with the GIMPS project's pages, and 10+ and 10, to the repunits (with many maintainers, for a list please see 10001 and 11111). P.S. I put out a test for discussions. Last fiddled with by Batalov on 20090814 at 07:55 
20091002, 05:48  #30 
Jul 2003
So Cal
2098_{10} Posts 
6,317+ has been completed by NFS@Home:
Code:
68digit prime factor: 11945361088850933777390788537647098376873971990473200125789018538899 158digit prime factor: 13346683767756739751221171391453612510290695982921903538908296073270577730965354291094433347373531609778283156038003000968646967209671655512834647619164750607 Last fiddled with by frmky on 20091002 at 05:53 Reason: Add log file 
20091005, 20:31  #31 
Jul 2003
So Cal
832_{16} Posts 
And 6,316+ has been completed by NFS@Home as well...
Code:
101digit prime factor: 20718198856970031943042431298278006707891007274509577088151415807574320198826712628040225780951132201 110digit prime factor: 12982820825896490041085564332226827434385115418527415362505503451547310539809374170981407741870653553618632449 Last fiddled with by frmky on 20091005 at 20:35 Reason: Add log file 
20091007, 13:00  #32 
Jun 2005
lehigh.edu
2^{10} Posts 
To complete the sequence of three Wanted from the 6+ list, we have
6, 314+ C209 factored as Code:
prp69 factor: 127990570696623010387437346082972860280218929783270356827690059243181 prp141 factor: 188319680286819627530088258891375898122332689005870859461836523838286397646922041895253964126997311634948826781446996032824188043732759470097 
20091206, 21:18  #33 
Jul 2003
So Cal
100000110010_{2} Posts 
NFS@Home has completed 6,334+. The postprocessing was completed with msieve. I ran the filtering, generated the matrix, and then transferred the matrix to Jeff Gilchrist. Jeff then completed the long linear algebra and transferred the dependencies back to me. I then ran the square roots. The log is attached.
80digit prime factor: 51502221799707178125025528282930027721442937798693063043926320591434734001630893 101digit prime factor: 41422280661767885986788301046332645192976796405559179732383361255631887230356707467626379138546914777 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
5+ table  garo  Cunningham Tables  100  20210104 22:36 
7+ table  garo  Cunningham Tables  86  20210104 22:35 
3+ table  garo  Cunningham Tables  150  20200323 21:41 
5 table  garo  Cunningham Tables  82  20200315 21:47 
6 table  garo  Cunningham Tables  41  20160804 04:24 