20220924, 03:05  #34 
May 2007
Kansas; USA
2^{3}·5·17^{2} Posts 
There are 13 sequences shown on the list with a cofactor size of <= 116. Their Csizes are 86, 102, 106, 110 (8 of them), 114, and 116.
I have cleared them. If I've observed/calculated correctly, all sequences are now C>=123 and we've now dropped under 400 remaining. Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20220924 at 03:07 
20220924, 14:48  #35 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
11766_{8} Posts 
There are now 373 sequences shown.
I hope to have a second list by cofactor size in a little while. I've been leaving a few of the smallest ones for others to complete, including yourself. I have run ECM t40 up through 63^97 and am expecting to continue with that work from 63^98 today. I still need to do some script edits, so will be working probably above c135 in a little while with NFS. 
20220925, 02:13  #36 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
5110_{10} Posts 
t40 ECM now done through 77^97. More tomorrow. . .

20220925, 12:49  #37 
May 2007
Kansas; USA
10110100101000_{2} Posts 
I factored the 5 sequences that were C<116. I've queued up the next 4 that are C<126.

20220927, 02:09  #38 
May 2007
Kansas; USA
26450_{8} Posts 
I ran a full set of curves (31% of factor size) on all C<=131.
I got 3 splits. 58^97, 77^94, and 87^78. 58^97 was lucky with a P45. 77^94 was ridiculously lucky with a P50! So there are now 18 sequences at C<=131 that are ready for NFS. 
20220927, 02:21  #39  
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
2·5·7·73 Posts 
Quote:
Are you going to run the C≤131s. I've been leaving the smaller ones for you. 

20220927, 02:46  #40  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
2^{3}·5·17^{2} Posts 
Quote:
I'm going to load everything up to C133 for full ECM and see how long it takes. I'm aware that you've ECM'd everything <= base 77 to t40 and that everything else is at least at t35. If it's taking too long, I'll stop it at some point. After that, I'll start running some NFS here. Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20220927 at 02:48 

20220927, 07:25  #41 
May 2007
Kansas; USA
2^{3}·5·17^{2} Posts 
All sequences for C<=133 have now been fully ECM'd.
There were 2 more splits in the C132133 range: 48^93 and 92^91. I'll take the remaining 11 sequences at C<130 for testing. 
20220927, 13:53  #42 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns
2×5×7×73 Posts 
I forgot to post last night that I'd run t40 through 86^96. I'm continuing upward from that point today. I'll look for any c<134 and pull them from my list.
We're trimmed the original list by well more than 50%! 
20220928, 02:26  #43 
May 2007
Kansas; USA
2D28_{16} Posts 
All sequences with cofactor C<130 digits have been cleared.
Next I will do full ECM on all C134135. Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20220928 at 02:59 
20220928, 12:54  #44 
May 2007
Kansas; USA
2^{3}·5·17^{2} Posts 
All sequences for C<140 have now been fully ECM'd.
There was only one split for C134135. Many of them were already at t40 so didn't have much more to do. I'll take the C130s and C131s for testing. Total of 7 sequences. Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20220928 at 12:55 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
A new idea for OEIS "triangle read by rows" sequence  sweety439  sweety439  4  20220528 06:20 
Aliquot Sequence 18528  Team Project?  EdH  Aliquot Sequences  45  20210627 12:30 
Is there a copy of "the" aliquot tree anywhere?  Dubslow  Aliquot Sequences  11  20161102 05:05 
Possible extention to the "GPU to 72 Tool" project?  chalsall  GPU to 72  332  20120104 01:45 
Collaborative mathematics: the "polymath" project  Dougy  Math  11  20091021 10:04 