mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Cunningham Tables

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2019-06-28, 23:42   #1
sweety439
 
sweety439's Avatar
 
Nov 2016

1001001001002 Posts
Default 10, 323-

10, 323- is the first hole of the 10- table as of 2014 (almost 5 years), and until now nobody factored it, currently it is one of the "most wanted" number in the Cunningham project (see http://homes.cerias.purdue.edu/~ssw/...dir150/want135)

The composite cofactor of this number is C271 (i.e. 271 digits), currently there are 3 C271 composite numbers that are being factored (2,1072+, 3,763- and 5, 449-) see http://homes.cerias.purdue.edu/~ssw/cun/who), but not including 10, 323-, is there any interest for this number?

Last fiddled with by sweety439 on 2019-06-28 at 23:43
sweety439 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-06-29, 00:14   #2
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

723210 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweety439 View Post
10, 323- is the first hole of the 10- table as of 2014 (almost 5 years), and until now nobody factored it, currently it is one of the "most wanted" number in the Cunningham project (see http://homes.cerias.purdue.edu/~ssw/...dir150/want135)

The composite cofactor of this number is C271 (i.e. 271 digits), currently there are 3 C271 composite numbers that are being factored (2,1072+, 3,763- and 5, 449-) see
You are confused. This is C324 not C271 via SNFS. C271 is way way out of reach
for GNFS. All of these numbers are being done by SNFS. The size of the composite
cofactor is irrelevant. e.g. 2,1072+ is a C323 via SNFS.

Quote:

http://homes.cerias.purdue.edu/~ssw/cun/who), but not including 10, 323-, is there any interest for this number?
NFS@Home is currently working on several base 2 numbers after which I anticipate
it will start on C318's. It should get to 10,323- in perhaps a year or two.
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-06-29, 00:38   #3
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

2·3·727 Posts
Default

OP could do some ECM curves at B1=850M or bigger; if a factor of 60 or more digits is found, any remaining C211 or smaller cofactor is then a GNFS candidate, and one we might be interested in.

This number deserves a t65 or so anyway, so running a few tens of thousands curves on ECM is productive work. Go for it, sweety!
VBCurtis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-06-29, 00:54   #4
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

26·113 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
OP could do some ECM curves at B1=850M or bigger; if a factor of 60 or more digits is found, any remaining C211 or smaller cofactor is then a GNFS candidate, and one we might be interested in.

This number deserves a t65 or so anyway, so running a few tens of thousands curves on ECM is productive work. Go for it, sweety!
Pointless. Bruce already did *extensive* ECM on the Wanted numbers. If you want
to run ECM start at B1 = 3G or more. I would not bother. The number is ready for NFS.
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-06-29, 00:58   #5
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

26×113 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman View Post
Pointless. Bruce already did *extensive* ECM on the Wanted numbers. If you want
to run ECM start at B1 = 3G or more. I would not bother. The number is ready for NFS.
It is probable that Propper ran some curves on this number as well. Ask both
Bruce and Ryan......
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-06-29, 04:08   #6
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

2·3·727 Posts
Default

Thank you for the correction. I guessed that this was tested only slightly further than the smaller-but-needed C204 in the other active thread.

How high in SNFS difficulty do you think NFS@home can go with 16f/33LP? I wonder when we run out of yield within the Q-range that GGNFS can test. SNFS-340? 350?

Last fiddled with by VBCurtis on 2019-06-29 at 04:09
VBCurtis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-06-29, 10:25   #7
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

26·113 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
Thank you for the correction. I guessed that this was tested only slightly further than the smaller-but-needed C204 in the other active thread.

How high in SNFS difficulty do you think NFS@home can go with 16f/33LP? I wonder when we run out of yield within the Q-range that GGNFS can test. SNFS-340? 350?
Sieving is not the binding constraint. LA is.
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-06-29, 17:06   #8
kurtb
 
"Beschorner Kurt"
Jul 2016
Germany

19 Posts
Default

I can put in the YOYO-queue some/a lot of curves with B1=2e9.
But is that useful if NFS@home starts R323-snfs in about 1 year?
Kurt
kurtb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-06-29, 19:05   #9
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

2×3×727 Posts
Default

No, as Mr Silverman explained it's ready for NFS already. There are more difficult numbers that haven't had t65+ and make sense for yoyo. I think running 3e9 curves on this number would be for the glory of a 70ish-digit factor rather than necessity.
VBCurtis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2019-06-29, 20:39   #10
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

26×113 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
No, as Mr Silverman explained it's ready for NFS already. There are more difficult numbers that haven't had t65+ and make sense for yoyo. I think running 3e9 curves on this number would be for the glory of a 70ish-digit factor rather than necessity.
I thought that YoYo was going to run the remaining base 2 numbers with index < 1200???
There are plenty of numbers in that list!
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-22, 22:48   #11
sweety439
 
sweety439's Avatar
 
Nov 2016

44448 Posts
Default

10, 323- still not be started to factor (see https://homes.cerias.purdue.edu/~ssw/cun/who.txt), however, 10, 323- is the third most wanted number in https://homes.cerias.purdue.edu/~ssw/cun/want137.txt now, I think we (or NFS@home) should factor it, it is more important than 3,667-, 6,451-, 7,376+ (which are started) etc.
sweety439 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


All times are UTC. The time now is 22:08.

Mon Oct 19 22:08:39 UTC 2020 up 39 days, 19:19, 0 users, load averages: 1.91, 1.68, 1.66

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.