mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Lone Mersenne Hunters > LMH > 100M

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2005-02-08, 15:31   #56
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

19×263 Posts
Default

I don't care which I run for fun-- this or the billion-digit search. I picked up a couple weeks' worth of factoring on the Billion site last night, so if you get things updated within 2-3 weeks, I'll be happy to contribute.

I finished the range mentioned yesterday, but I'm not sure where to email it.. yahoo rejected the mail sent to addy on the site.

If your efforts are better spent helping admin the BD search, I'm happy to help there, too, and let this one slide into darkness.
-Curtis
VBCurtis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-02-14, 16:02   #57
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

19×263 Posts
Default

I'll have everything from 333100000 to 333600000 finished to 52 bits by the weekend. Where do I email the results files? Can I get your filtering program, so I can extend the ranges to 54 or 55 bits for exponents without a factor? I have 3 slow (500 or slower) machines working on factoring.

-Curtis
VBCurtis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-02-14, 17:08   #58
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

23×32×139 Posts
Default

The e-mail address listed on the site is active again. The program is touchy, (it has a quirk or two) and I don't want to have somebody lose data when it gets run. I will try to be more on top of things...
Uncwilly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-03-11, 06:07   #59
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

19×263 Posts
Default

I'll finish the first range (333100-333200K) to 55 bits over the weekend. I built the worktodo file by hand from the 50-bit results.... UncWilly, did you get the other results files? This search seems useful in the nearer future, so I want to run half my classroom's machines on it (they're nearly all on Billion right now); there's joy in finding factors so quickly, too. Maybe the posts will stir a little interest in the project!
I plan to build another worktodo to 56 or 57 bits next week for the same range-- easy to change bit-limits and delete the exponents with factors found during the previous pass.
Any guidance?
-Curtis
VBCurtis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-03-11, 07:40   #60
ValerieVonck
 
ValerieVonck's Avatar
 
Mar 2004
Belgium

292 Posts
Default

M333700000 to M333799999 from 1 to 50 bits
ValerieVonck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-03-11, 15:58   #61
Peter Nelson
 
Peter Nelson's Avatar
 
Oct 2004

232 Posts
Default Factoring probabilities

Hi, I'm interested in how likely we are to find a factor by trial factoring.

Primenet records a found factor, but regretably (with hindsight) not the number of tests required to find it.

With 100mdpp you have opportunity to record/collate this important stat.

Therefore could the person who has these results please count up for me, and ideally update your project website to include this info.

If you could break it down by bit depth that would be great!

Or raw data would be acceptable and I will collate my own stats.

Something like eg 332,192,831 through nnn nnn nnn tested exhaustively to 50 bits and found fff factors. (followed by next range by someone else).

If you have no idea what I'm talking about say so and I will try to clarify.
Peter Nelson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-03-11, 17:06   #62
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

271816 Posts
Default

I think that I may know what you mean. Later today I will get off my rear and work on the site when I get to the machine that has the data on it.
BTW, do you mean xxx,xxx,xxx to yyy,yyy,yyy have been tested to zz bits and found aaa factors is acceptable to any zz? Cause once I ran groups through a set bit level, I culled all that had factors, then reprocessed the remainders to a higher level.
Uncwilly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-03-12, 00:22   #63
ValerieVonck
 
ValerieVonck's Avatar
 
Mar 2004
Belgium

292 Posts
Default

M333700000 to M333799999 from 1 to 50 bits => Complete
ValerieVonck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-03-12, 17:57   #64
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

19·263 Posts
Default

Peter--
It seems easy enough to report batches (likely in the 100K increments UncWilly has set up on his page) by number of factors found from xx bits to yy bits.
UncWilly has set up the search to run to 50 bits first, then run the nonfactored numbers to 52 or 53, etc... this seems like the type of data you wish for, in the sense of "if we run one more bit on this batch, how much time per factor does it cost?" My current batch is running 50 to 55 bits, and I'll post number of factors found (and time spent/machine speed) Tuesday when the run finishes.
However, though I have no specific thread in mind, these stats have been run extensively on smaller numbers for GIMPS to determine the most efficient use of time between factoring and LL testing; George has the bit depth set so that when factoring takes more time per expected factor found than LL, Primenet moves the exponent from TF status to LL test status. For exponents around 28 million (the last size I TF'ed for Primenet), that cutoff was 69 bits. For project billion, someone calculated the level as roughly 85 bits (ouch!), but the calculation is heavily dependent on the speed of the code doing the factoring, and the code doing the LL testing, so none of us would really work to 85 bits on a number (not to mention the years it would take!).
-Curtis
VBCurtis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-03-13, 01:05   #65
ValerieVonck
 
ValerieVonck's Avatar
 
Mar 2004
Belgium

292 Posts
Default

Range: 333600000 333699999
Number of exponents: 5127
from 1 to 50
Reserved

Last fiddled with by ValerieVonck on 2005-03-13 at 01:05
ValerieVonck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2005-03-13, 01:13   #66
cheesehead
 
cheesehead's Avatar
 
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA

22·3·641 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Nelson
Hi, I'm interested in how likely we are to find a factor by trial factoring.
AFAIK we have only the empirical statement on http://mersenne.org/math.htm (last paragraph in "Trial Factoring" section) that the chance of finding a factor between 2^x and 2^(x+1) is about 1/x. But note that (a) this was derived from TF on rather smaller exponents and ranges, and (b) it's an approximation that breaks down when the size of the Mersenne's exponent is too close to the size of the factors being tried (i.e, k in 2kp+1 is small).

See thread "Probability of finding a factor" at http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=2689

Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2005-03-13 at 01:21
cheesehead is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
100m p-1 and tf aurashift Software 18 2016-04-14 13:48
100M digits, how much trial factoring will it do? xorbe LMH > 100M 189 2010-12-09 08:30
Who is LL-ing a mersenne number > 100M digits? joblack LMH > 100M 1 2009-10-08 12:31
Hitting 100M digits on the head davieddy Lounge 1 2008-10-18 10:40
Special Project Level 3 (25 digits, B1=50K) wblipp ElevenSmooth 0 2003-10-15 16:07

All times are UTC. The time now is 18:50.


Thu Oct 21 18:50:14 UTC 2021 up 90 days, 13:19, 1 user, load averages: 1.95, 1.41, 1.30

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.