mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Factoring

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2022-05-13, 20:14   #485
sweety439
 
sweety439's Avatar
 
"99(4^34019)99 palind"
Nov 2016
(P^81993)SZ base 36

22·863 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris2be8 View Post
I don't know who found the last 2 factors. Though I suspect they were in http://myfactors.mooo.com/ all along (I forgot to check that since 89^145-1 isn't a first hole).


Now reserving (51^169-1)/(51^13-1) which I've just checked in both factordb and http://myfactors.mooo.com/ (this is the last Brent first hole I can do by SNFS, 43^187-1 is too big for me).
Indeed, when I try to use N-1 proof or N+1 proof for the generalized repunit primes base b (primes of the form (b^n-1)/(b-1)) and the Williams primes base b (primes of the form (b+-1)*b^n+-1 or b^n+-(b+-1), for (b+-1)*b^n+-1 it can be easily use N-1 proof or N+1 proof, since their N-1 or N+1 are trivially 100% factored, while for b^n+-(b+-1) it cannot), and for (b^n-1)/(b-1) or b^n+-(b+-1), either N-1 or N+1 is a product of a small number and a Cunningham number base b (i.e. b^n-1 or b^n+1), and I found many prime factors of the Cunningham numbers b^n+-1 for various bases b which are in factordb but not in http://myfactors.mooo.com/, or in http://myfactors.mooo.com/ but not in factordb (e.g. 202^114+1, in that time, in factordb it is fully factored, while in http://myfactors.mooo.com/ it is not, thus I reported the missing prime factor to http://myfactors.mooo.com/), and thus I reported many prime factors to both factordb and http://myfactors.mooo.com/, even there are such prime factors from 9 digits to 16 digits

(at first, I reported all algebraic factors of b^n+-1 (i.e. b^d+-1 for all d dividing n) to factordb, and I use the "single factorization" of b^n+-1 in http://myfactorcollection.mooo.com:8090/dbio.html, to check the number of the digits of the composites in both factordb and http://myfactors.mooo.com/, and found all missing factors (http://myfactors.mooo.com/ always contain the Aurifeuillian factors, while factordb does not, so I reported all Aurifeuillian factors to factordb, for large bases, the Aurifeuillian factors may not have simple expression)

Last fiddled with by sweety439 on 2022-05-13 at 20:20
sweety439 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-05-19, 15:42   #486
chris2be8
 
chris2be8's Avatar
 
Sep 2009

22·587 Posts
Default

Does anyone know who factored 91^139-1 ? When I checked the last holes after factoring 19^221-1 I noticed it was factored. The factors were not in factordb (just in http://myfactors.mooo.com/) so I added them.

And is anyone working on 91^145-1 ? That had one factor in http://myfactors.mooo.com/ that was not in factordb which made it a c162 (easier than SNFS). If no one else is interested I'll reserve it when I've finished my current work. But knowing how much ECM it has had would be useful (and for other Brent tables entries).
chris2be8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-05-24, 15:36   #487
chris2be8
 
chris2be8's Avatar
 
Sep 2009

22×587 Posts
Default

No response, so I'll reserve 91^145-1 for ECM, then GNFS if necessary.
chris2be8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-05-25, 15:41   #488
chris2be8
 
chris2be8's Avatar
 
Sep 2009

1001001011002 Posts
Default

91^145-1 is done:
Code:
Resuming ECM residue saved by chris@4core with GMP-ECM 7.0.5-dev on Wed May 25 02:20:39 2022 
Input number is 226088645816690622526216192237433132289716120596615879258943738679800848841925182810918535350862314783145826431392790171177036695401809764438467711098864889811821 (162 digits)
Using B1=192515022-192515022, B2=35898316301, polynomial Dickson(12), sigma=3:2579256380
Step 1 took 0ms
Step 2 took 12337ms
********** Factor found in step 2: 530977029096293569657298089270576213990222019029061
Found prime factor of 51 digits: 530977029096293569657298089270576213990222019029061
Prime cofactor 425797413875862922863398299445431143067697770734535630010882207961101093249245867331220279940163292093871953161 has 111 digits
chris2be8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-06-22, 06:53   #489
sweety439
 
sweety439's Avatar
 
"99(4^34019)99 palind"
Nov 2016
(P^81993)SZ base 36

22·863 Posts
Default

How to use SNFS or GNFS to factor the composite cofactors of 13^282+1 and 13^288+1 (they only have 147 digits and 13^288+1, respectively, also their SNFS difficulty are low)
sweety439 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-06-22, 08:48   #490
BudgieJane
 
BudgieJane's Avatar
 
"Jane Sullivan"
Jan 2011
Beckenham, UK

24×19 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweety439 View Post
How to use SNFS or GNFS to factor the composite cofactors of 13^282+1 and 13^288+1 (they only have 147 digits and 13^288+1, respectively, also their SNFS difficulty are low)
I think you meant to say that 13^288+1 only has 152 digits.
BudgieJane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-06-22, 08:57   #491
sweety439
 
sweety439's Avatar
 
"99(4^34019)99 palind"
Nov 2016
(P^81993)SZ base 36

65748 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BudgieJane View Post
I think you meant to say that 13^288+1 only has 152 digits.
Yes, I copy-and-paste, but copied the wrong texts.

So how to use SNFS or GNFS to factor 13^282+1 and 13^288+1? They seems to have low difficulty.
sweety439 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-06-22, 11:22   #492
kruoli
 
kruoli's Avatar
 
"Oliver"
Sep 2017
Porta Westfalica, DE

40516 Posts
Default

They have high SNFS difficulty and are better done with GNFS instead.

For GNFS, simply use YAFU(2) or CADO-NFS. It will select everything it needs on it's own.

Last fiddled with by kruoli on 2022-06-22 at 11:23 Reason: Correction and extension.
kruoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-06-22, 12:15   #493
swellman
 
swellman's Avatar
 
Jun 2012

2×52×71 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweety439 View Post
So how to use SNFS or GNFS to factor 13^282+1 and 13^288+1? They seems to have low difficulty.
YAFU or CADO will give you the necessary polynomials be they SNFS or GNFS, but for an instructive exercise try plugging these expressions into Crombie’s cownoise page (look under Calculators).

The SNFS of each is fairly low (209 and 213 respectively) and a sextic makes for easy sieving.

GNFS is a viable choice as well, though personally I would forgo the GNFS poly search and go right to SNFS.

Give it a try. PM me if you want to discuss further.
swellman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-06-22, 12:19   #494
kruoli
 
kruoli's Avatar
 
"Oliver"
Sep 2017
Porta Westfalica, DE

3·73 Posts
Default

Where is my error thinking that both have >300 SNFS difficulty? Is this wrong because of algebraic factors?
kruoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2022-06-22, 12:32   #495
swellman
 
swellman's Avatar
 
Jun 2012

2×52×71 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kruoli View Post
Where is my error thinking that both have >300 SNFS difficulty? Is this wrong because of algebraic factors?
Yes. I do the same thing at times: SNFS = log(13^282+1) = 314 but as you say it ignores the algebraic factors.

Phi() is another tool for generating accurate SNFS polys.
swellman is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Vanishing Fermat Quotients and Brent's List Zeta-Flux Factoring 74 2010-04-07 22:03
Brent-Suyama extension of P-1 factoring S485122 Math 1 2009-08-23 15:21
Brent-Montgomery-te Riele numbers FactorEyes Factoring 23 2008-02-22 00:36
brent suyama extension in P-1 bsquared Factoring 9 2007-05-18 19:24
Brent's p-1 - How to deal with memory problems? jhillenb Factoring 4 2005-01-11 23:50

All times are UTC. The time now is 10:36.


Wed Jun 29 10:36:19 UTC 2022 up 76 days, 8:37, 1 user, load averages: 1.63, 1.69, 1.46

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