mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Factoring

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2009-09-12, 13:54   #848
fivemack
(loop (#_fork))
 
fivemack's Avatar
 
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England

2·3,191 Posts
Default An honest-to-someone ECM miss

10-7.191 S191 (152) [14e/27lp/2^23sp] (1048428s + 336s + 11837s@4CPU + 1478s/2)
Fri Sep 11 20:08:31 2009 prp42 factor: 602042088775639986918297776645429449546619
Fri Sep 11 20:08:31 2009 prp110 factor: 33929634886978114141291477425365580390751852643524199226349853412013173286258912284088108701389099986638761717

(a million seconds is nearly 2*p45, and the factor's only a p42)
fivemack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 15:57   #849
Joe O
 
Joe O's Avatar
 
Aug 2002

3×52×7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fivemack View Post
10-7.191 S191 (152) [14e/27lp/2^23sp] (1048428s + 336s + 11837s@4CPU + 1478s/2)
Fri Sep 11 20:08:31 2009 prp42 factor: 602042088775639986918297776645429449546619
Fri Sep 11 20:08:31 2009 prp110 factor: 33929634886978114141291477425365580390751852643524199226349853412013173286258912284088108701389099986638761717

(a million seconds is nearly 2*p45, and the factor's only a p42)
Are you saying that
1) not enough ECM was run on this number?
2) the ECM program is faulty?
3) something else?
Joe O is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 16:13   #850
fivemack
(loop (#_fork))
 
fivemack's Avatar
 
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England

2·3,191 Posts
Default

I tend to use 'ECM miss' to mean 'if I'd run ECM instead of snfs, I would have found the factor more quickly'; I appreciate this is probably not the normal use of the term.
fivemack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-14, 18:26   #851
R.D. Silverman
 
R.D. Silverman's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

22·5·373 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fivemack View Post
I tend to use 'ECM miss' to mean 'if I'd run ECM instead of snfs, I would have found the factor more quickly'; I appreciate this is probably not the normal use of the term.
No, I would say that this is the accepted usage of "ECM miss".
R.D. Silverman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-16, 06:50   #852
Andi47
 
Andi47's Avatar
 
Oct 2004
Austria

46628 Posts
Default 7,2,247+

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andi47 View Post
Do I get this right, a difficulty-193-SNFS would take approx. as long as a 193*0.69 = 133-digit GNFS and thus would be in range for home computing?
Seems that this one didn't have much ECM (unfortunately, the reservation page doesn't give information about the amount of ECM done on each number).

Yesterday, I just thought to give it a try and run a bunch of curves on it overnight, and...

Code:
Run 110 out of 500:
Using B1=11000000, B2=35133391030, polynomial Dickson(12), sigma=4183249465
Step 1 took 237281ms
Step 2 took 62016ms
********** Factor found in step 2: 2349783051111976239049347232722196704029
Found probable prime factor of 40 digits: 2349783051111976239049347232722196704029
Probable prime cofactor 1541091246548990353689435982710386631762710119356152870973958183688458251235091483146681989184564163537618914925796259 has 118 digits
Andi47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-16, 07:00   #853
xilman
Bamboozled!
 
xilman's Avatar
 
"π’‰Ίπ’ŒŒπ’‡·π’†·π’€­"
May 2003
Down not across

295B16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andi47 View Post
Seems that this one didn't have much ECM (unfortunately, the reservation page doesn't give information about the amount of ECM done on each number).

Yesterday, I just thought to give it a try and run a bunch of curves on it overnight, and...

Code:
Run 110 out of 500:
Using B1=11000000, B2=35133391030, polynomial Dickson(12), sigma=4183249465
Step 1 took 237281ms
Step 2 took 62016ms
********** Factor found in step 2: 2349783051111976239049347232722196704029
Found probable prime factor of 40 digits: 2349783051111976239049347232722196704029
Probable prime cofactor 1541091246548990353689435982710386631762710119356152870973958183688458251235091483146681989184564163537618914925796259 has 118 digits
All the numbers in the ECMnet server have essentially the same amount of work done on them, that being the allocation strategy set up.

At the moment, the server is about half-way through handing out curves with B1=3M, so the expected size of factors to be found will be around 40 digits or perhaps a little less.

That the p40 factor above has not yet been found by the ECMnet clients is not at all surprising.


Paul
xilman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-16, 11:44   #854
Joe O
 
Joe O's Avatar
 
Aug 2002

3·52·7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fivemack View Post
I tend to use 'ECM miss' to mean 'if I'd run ECM instead of snfs, I would have found the factor more quickly'; I appreciate this is probably not the normal use of the term.
But even at 2*P45 there would be a ~14% probability of missing a 45 digit factor. It might have taken a lot more curves, and cpu time.
Joe O is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-16, 17:52   #855
yoyo
 
yoyo's Avatar
 
Oct 2006
Berlin, Germany

2·3·101 Posts
Default

Should I run some ECM curves via yoyo@home on it?
yoyo
yoyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-17, 17:16   #856
unconnected
 
unconnected's Avatar
 
May 2009
Russia, Moscow

43·59 Posts
Default

7^299-6^299
c183=p43*p140
p43=1895196682008094522046817009226083917957561

by ECM
unconnected is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-17, 20:40   #857
Yamato
 
Yamato's Avatar
 
Sep 2005
Berlin

2×3×11 Posts
Default

Some more factors...
Code:
Run 172 out of 1000:
Using B1=3000000, B2=5706890290, polynomial Dickson(6), sigma=664469849
Step 1 took 11192ms
********** Factor found in step 1: 16329409528242736979240605668734636153
Found probable prime factor of 38 digits: 16329409528242736979240605668734636153
Probable prime cofactor (((((9^203-8^203)/407353462746867001)/298093771407041)/6233803301928460803553)/4555386192335572300559213161)/16329409528242736979240605668734636153 has 75 digits

Run 27 out of 1000:
Using B1=3000000, B2=5706890290, polynomial Dickson(6), sigma=2682735469
Step 1 took 20494ms
Step 2 took 8464ms
********** Factor found in step 2: 524451880982120622418669944269190199223
Found probable prime factor of 39 digits: 524451880982120622418669944269190199223
Probable prime cofactor ((8^257+5^257)/(13*5746950733*38434462212856815594943*1258221908128778009146226401))/524451880982120622418669944269190199223 has 133 digits
Yamato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-17, 22:50   #858
fivemack
(loop (#_fork))
 
fivemack's Avatar
 
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England

2×3,191 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yoyo View Post
Should I run some ECM curves via yoyo@home on it?
yoyo
There's already an ecmnet server (port 8194 on the machine 83.143.57.194) set up with these numbers in; I think to some extent they're intended as a gentle introduction for the NFS methods, and throwing CPU-years of ECM at them might be inappropriate.
fivemack is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New phi for homogeneous Cunningham numbers wpolly Factoring 26 2016-07-29 04:34
Mathematics of Cunningham Numbers (3rd ed., 2002, A.M.S.) Xyzzy Cunningham Tables 42 2014-04-02 18:31
Don't know how to work on Cunningham numbers. jasong GMP-ECM 6 2006-06-30 08:51
Doing Cunningham numbers but messed up. jasong Factoring 1 2006-04-03 17:18
Need help factoring Cunningham numbers jasong Factoring 27 2006-03-21 02:47

All times are UTC. The time now is 05:04.

Sat Feb 27 05:04:36 UTC 2021 up 86 days, 1:15, 0 users, load averages: 3.07, 2.47, 2.07

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.