Re: Surrogate factoring, corrected algorithm
From: Tim Peters (tim.one_at_comcast.net)
Date: 02/17/05
- Next message: John Schutkeker: "Re: Riemann integrability of a composite function"
- Previous message: Michael Olea: "Cantor's Corn Chips"
- In reply to: Tim Peters: "Re: Surrogate factoring, corrected algorithm"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 00:21:06 -0500
[JSH]
>> [...]
>> Then the corrected algorithm is as follows.
[Tim Peters]
> As far as I can see, the only difference from the weekend's algorithm is
> that this one iterates over splittings of T^3 j^2 instead of over T j^2.
My mistake, and my apologies for that. The equations for w also changed:
they were adding 2j^2 in the weekend algorithm, but are adding 2Tj^2 in this
algorithm.
After correcting the implementation to match, at M = 112554401 * 221667653
it still (of course) does the same number of gcds. It still doesn't find a
factor at any j in 1 through 16, and j=17 is still very expensive (and is
still running, so I can't say what will happen with it yet -- and I won't
bother, unless it turns out to be really interesting).
- Next message: John Schutkeker: "Re: Riemann integrability of a composite function"
- Previous message: Michael Olea: "Cantor's Corn Chips"
- In reply to: Tim Peters: "Re: Surrogate factoring, corrected algorithm"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
