Aliquot sequences that start on the integer powers n^i

[yoyo]

I'll take also bases 101 and 102.

[garambois]

Page updated.
Many thanks to all !

Added bases : 419, 421.
New bases reserved by yoyo : 89, 90, 91, 92 (except sequence 92^61 for Sergiosi), 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 99, 101, 102.
Updated bases : 103, 313 and some others...

[gd_barnes]

I have completed testing of new bases 419 and 421 all open sequences to >= 120 digits.

All bases > 350 are back to complete to >= 120 digits.

It looks like you got all of my testing to 120 digits in for base 419 with the recent update so no more update needed there.

For base 421, updates only needed for exponents 16, 22, 24, 28, 30, and 46.

Also per my post 2082, previous new bases 401 and 409 need to be updated for the 120-digit work. That work completed ~2 days after you updated last time.

I seem to have a bad habit of finishing up the testing to 120 digits on new bases a few hours to 1-2 days right after you do an update. :-) This creates the need to update them twice. :-(

In the future, I'll give you an idea of where I'm at on testing of new bases to 120 digits. That could save you some update work.

[gd_barnes]

Originally Posted by yoyo

Yes, for base 72 those 2 sequences:
72^89
72^91

To Yoyo:

Yoyo had the above reservation from a Sept. 11th post. No work has been done on them since Sept. 30. They are not shown in your reservations list. Are you done with them?

[gd_barnes]

Originally Posted by richs

Releasing 34^105 at index 7. The C139 is ecm'd to t35.

Jean-Luc,

Per above, Rich released 34^105 back on Sept. 25th so his reservation can be removed from the page.

[garambois]

Gary, I have read all your messages.
I will fix things in the next update.
Don't worry if I have to update a base twice.
Indeed, since Karsten sent me the new scripts, it goes much faster !
But for the updates of all the bases, it starts to become long because of the number of bases which becomes important now !
I will do such a complete update towards the end of December.
So don't worry if I miss some bases that should have been updated : anyway, it will be done by the end of December.

[gd_barnes]

Thanks for the info.

I'll just let you know that I'm close to finishing having all bases > 300 all sequences tested to >= 120 digits. All bases are done with the exception of bases 306 and 307, which are partially done with work ongoing now. I estimate completion late Wednesday-early Thursday.

[gd_barnes]

In running the 120-digit effort, I have also made it a point that cofactors would be >=110 digits. In this vein, I did a project-wide search of other bases outside of my effort that are at 120 digits but had some cofactors that were at < 110 digits. There weren't many, a total of 44 sequences on 14 bases. I have tested them to a fully ECM'd cofactor of >= 110 digits. Here are the sequences that were tested:

Base^exponent(s)
3^24, 40, 62, 70, 114, 214, 228
10^139
13^26
14^75, 83, 91
20^25
23^46
24^51
33^14
43^50
103^52
105^14, 16, 24, 32, 34, 44, 46, 48
127^12, 20, 30, 32, 36, 40, 42, 56, 58
15015^8, 10, 18, 20, 28
223092870^1, 3, 13

All bases where all sequences are at >= 120 digits size now have all cofactors of >= 110 digits.

[VBCurtis]

13^36 has reached 160 digits with an ECM'ed C150 cofactor. It can be updated, with 2^4 * 31 driver I don't think I'll work on it further.

[gd_barnes]

I have completed testing of all bases > 300 all open sequences to >= 120 digits.

For this cycle, completed were bases in the 300 to 349 range. This included testing of bases 306, 307, 311, 313, 317, 331, 337, 347, and 349.

Work continues backwards by base for bases 299 to 250. There are 9 bases in this range with sequences at < 120 digits.

[Happy5214]

I'm releasing base 210 due to a lack of time to dedicate to this subproject.