20210619, 03:53  #496 
Jul 2003
wear a mask
3214_{8} Posts 

20210619, 11:08  #497 
Mar 2017
Halifax, NS
3×7 Posts 
Now this is the kind of thing I want to put my GPU to work on! If I'm understanding right, this range could use some TF to 70 bits? I didn't want to step on any toes, so I went way out of the way of ranges that looked like someone might be working on them. I'll start on 12.10, but if anyone wants to point me elsewhere, please do so!

20210619, 14:58  #498  
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada
13·19^{2} Posts 
Quote:
Pretty much all incomplete ranges will need some TF and more P1. Thanks 

20210619, 15:35  #499 
Romulan Interpreter
Jun 2011
Thailand
13·743 Posts 

20210620, 00:20  #500 
Mar 2017
Halifax, NS
3×7 Posts 
Great, thank you. It turns out I can crank through the entire 12.1X range up to 71 bits in about 10 days, so I'm already off to the races.

20210621, 02:36  #501 
If I May
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados
2^{2}·7·349 Posts 

20210624, 11:24  #502  
Romulan Interpreter
Jun 2011
Thailand
9659_{10} Posts 
Quote:
(albeit this was accidental, I didn't go for it, it just happened that you were one position above in both yearly and lifetime tops, and my ECM workers were on full throttle; I switched them to ECMF for now, to give you time to breath... ) Joking apart, we finished the 35.1M range, and found 71 factors from the 77 desired (mersenne.ca will catch up tomorrow, right now it only shows 68 factors), which took us 16 days. That makes 1 factor in 29.23 trials, considering the 2076 candidates we started with. That last subrange (35.19M) didn't produce the number of factors we were counting (like 10 or 11, considering that is has more candidates there) so we are now under the target. Not mentioning that we got a really huge (composite) factor which could better have been two different factors and eliminate two exponents instead of only one exponent! What a waste! But all in all, our luck was quite good. Now, for the next step, as axn suggested, we will try to go one bit higher (or deeper?) with TF, but we want to do that (for a start) only for the "bad" subranges which still have 200 or more candidates left, maybe we get lucky and kick two rabbits with a single mawashi again  i.e. getting the subranges under 200 expos each, albeit this is quite impossible with the current "scores", but a single bit advance in 4 subranges (close to 900 candidates) would, in theory, give us the 6 more factors we miss. In fact, the theoretic score should be 8 to 9 factors by raising those 4 subranges to 75 bits. Then: @Chris, is there any scenario possible in which your spiders grab the 35.1xM ranges from the server and pass them to my Colab, for x={0, 2, 7, 9}, or should I handle them manually? (which will take a lot more time). If not, is there a scenario possible in which at least the reports can be done through gpu72 API? (adding all the assignments by hand to worktodo in colab is just a few minutes job, but it is reporting of the results periodically what makes the job boring...). I ask because I see that you still didn't decide to offer this possibility (few of my results that I reported to you but were not assigned through you are still stuck in that table). Last fiddled with by LaurV on 20210624 at 11:31 

20210624, 11:48  #503  
"Viliam FurÃk"
Jul 2018
Martin, Slovakia
619 Posts 
Quote:
Setting the number of known factors to 0 makes it generate TF, P1 and P+1 assignments for a given range and a given B1 for unfactored exponents. 

20210624, 15:09  #504  
If I May
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados
9772_{10} Posts 
Quote:
Could you please activate one of your Colab instances? It will initially be helping Wayne in 28.6M to 73. Somewhat ironically, I no longer have any access to Colab GPUs. Or if I do get a GPU every week or so, it lasts about ten minutes. This makes testing somewhat problematic; I do have a "simulated" Colab environment, but it's currently on another job. Lastly, so there's no "toe stepping", I don't actually reserve the candidates from Primenet for the "Less than 2K" subproject. I'll start with 35.1M (to 75), and we can expand to other ranges as Wayne et al decide "makes sense". Thoughts? 

20210624, 15:24  #505  
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada
13·19^{2} Posts 
Quote:
If on the other hand Mr. L or anyone else has designs on more super aggressive P1 especially 35.3 then the remaining 3xM will only need partial TF to 75. In this scenario P1 should be first. Either way I expect 3xM to be complete in 2021. Then I'll take a deeper look at 2xM. This range will take a lot longer. But basically most subranges will need TF 73 and decent P1 effort. Last fiddled with by petrw1 on 20210624 at 15:28 

20210624, 15:28  #506 
If I May
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados
2^{2}×7×349 Posts 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Thinking of Joining GPU to 72  jschwar313  GPU to 72  3  20160131 00:50 
Thinking about lasieve5  Batalov  Factoring  6  20111227 22:40 
Thinking about buying a panda  jasong  jasong  1  20081111 09:43 
Loud thinking on irregular primes  devarajkandadai  Math  4  20070725 03:01 
Question on unfactored numbers...  WraithX  GMPECM  1  20060319 22:16 