mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Aliquot Sequences

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2022-10-31, 15:58   #122
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

5,077 Posts
Default

I believe 28^114 and 35^98 were both run at t50, before I scaled back to t47.8. It seems the only t47.8, actually was running a t45 (third time counting your two) when it found the factor instead of moving to the t47.8 step. T45 was taking about 20 mins and I was timing things and testing scripts.
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-10-31, 21:21   #123
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

31×179 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
I'll run 94^100 C156.
I marked it in post 1.
Finished, reported to factordb, and the entry has been removed from post 1.
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-10-31, 22:19   #124
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

5,077 Posts
Default

Great! Thanks!
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-11-01, 12:12   #125
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

13D516 Posts
Default

96^99 shed a p49, but left a c131. I'll go ahead and GNFS it today to see how long it takes with only a small portion of my machines.
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-11-02, 07:01   #126
gd_barnes
 
gd_barnes's Avatar
 
May 2007
Kansas; USA

22·2,887 Posts
Default

There have been 6 more splits since my last post. I've run ECM and a little NFS on their subsequent index(es). Here are their statuses:

ECM to t35. Move along; nothing to see here:
69^97: 177/142/3
94^100: 196/165/3
96^97: 193/164
96^99: 197/182

ECM to t40. Some potential:
96^94: 176/143/71 (6 indexes added)
210^78: 181/146/49414853 (large smallest factor)

I'm done with these.

Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2022-11-02 at 07:08
gd_barnes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-11-02, 13:21   #127
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

5,077 Posts
Default

I ran the c131 because it had survived t50, the sequence was still at index 1 and I wondered how long it would take using the machines that weren't doing ECM via the cluster. It took 9.5 hours, without any GPU support. I will probably use those machines for some more NFS, but I haven't figured out where, yet.

I'm not going to run 96^99 again, since the sequence is past index 1 and not of matched parity interest. c14x composites would take my machines longer than the expected double doubling of c13x composites because most of those machines do not run overnight.
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-11-12, 22:53   #128
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

5,077 Posts
Default

All index 1s with a composite > 153 have been ECMed to t50. My interest has drawn be elsewhere for a while.
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-11-15, 09:29   #129
gd_barnes
 
gd_barnes's Avatar
 
May 2007
Kansas; USA

1154810 Posts
Default

For the recently added new bases, the following sequences can be added to the 1st post:

1305184^30: 184/180
1727636^27: 169/155
1727636^28: 175/172

I have ECM'd all of these to t45. I've also done some work on other large opposite-parity exponents on these 2 bases. No other index 1's remain.

Ed, would it be helpful to show the ECM-level of each sequence in the first post? I believe all sequences with cofactors <= 153 digits plus the 3 sequences above would be at t45. Everything else would be t50.
gd_barnes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-11-15, 15:04   #130
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

10011110101012 Posts
Default

I'll look at that later today. My interest has dragged me away from this and the "easier" thread lately. My current script for this thread completes all by itself and I'd like to keep it that way, if possible, without me making any edits manually. Maybe for now, just a note for the ECM level done will work. I can add that into the script rather easily. Maybe I'll put that in a couple places in the post.
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-11-24, 08:59   #131
gd_barnes
 
gd_barnes's Avatar
 
May 2007
Kansas; USA

2D1C16 Posts
Default

47616^36 can be added.

It was ECM'd to t45.

I worked all of the untouched exponents on the 3 recent new bases. This is the only one that still remains at index 1.

Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2022-11-24 at 09:23
gd_barnes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-11-25, 13:03   #132
EdH
 
EdH's Avatar
 
"Ed Hall"
Dec 2009
Adirondack Mtns

507710 Posts
Default

1727636^28 index 1 broke for t50: c172 = p47 * prp126.
EdH is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A new idea for OEIS "triangle read by rows" sequence sweety439 sweety439 4 2022-05-28 06:20
Aliquot Sequence 18528 - Team Project? EdH Aliquot Sequences 45 2021-06-27 12:30
Is there a copy of "the" aliquot tree anywhere? Dubslow Aliquot Sequences 11 2016-11-02 05:05
Possible extention to the "GPU to 72 Tool" project? chalsall GPU to 72 332 2012-01-04 01:45
Collaborative mathematics: the "polymath" project Dougy Math 11 2009-10-21 10:04

All times are UTC. The time now is 22:48.


Mon Nov 28 22:48:29 UTC 2022 up 102 days, 20:17, 0 users, load averages: 1.02, 1.30, 1.38

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, 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.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎𝜍 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔