-   Computer Science & Computational Number Theory (
-   -   New ECPP record (currently: 57,125 digits) (

mjm 2014-12-30 17:36

New ECPP record (currently: 57,125 digits)
Peter Kaiser and Paul Underwood certified the primality of Lucas(140057) with Primo 4.1.0.
This is a 29271 decimal digit number! It is the new ECPP record.

See [URL][/URL]

philmoore 2014-12-31 11:27

Congratulations to Peter and Paul, and also to Marcel Martin for the first ECPP record done by Primo!

Puzzle-Peter 2014-12-31 12:51


It's not the first ECPP record set with Primo, there were several in the early 2000's. See the bottom of this page: [URL][/URL]

paulunderwood 2015-09-16 03:31

[url][/url] shows a new world record for ECPP. Congratulations to Philippe Alsina, Pierre Gazzano, Nik Lygeros, Olivier Rozier and André Solaris for their certification of Lehmer-Ramanujan(331,2129) with 29,492 decimal digits. :banana:

paulunderwood 2015-09-23 15:54

I pleased to announce a new ECPP record at 30,950 decimal digits. The proof of the Lucas Number V(148091) was started on 5th of January this year. It took until today to prove it using a 4x AMD 6174 (48 cores at 2.2GHz) and 100 days additionally spent in parallel on a AMD 1090T (6 cores at 3.2GHz) running phase 2 work.

I also congratulate Marcel Martin for his Primo program, which worked flawlessly.


ldesnogu 2015-09-24 05:43

Congrats! You beat CIDE record :smile:

paulunderwood 2016-11-23 13:55

2 Attachment(s)
It is with great pleasure that I proudly announce a new record ECPP certification of a 34093 digits prime. Arranged in a 331 by 103 grid the digits of the prime depicts the Mersenne prime exponent 57,885,161.

The certification process took 14 months using a 4 x AMD 6174 (48 cores at 2.2 GHz) and 200 days additionally spent in parallel on an AMD 1090T (6 cores at 3.2 GHz) running phase 2 work.

Why 57,885,161 and not 74,207,281? The answer: Although the latter Mersenne prime exponent was reported to the server at about the same time certification started, it was not for another 3 months that the new exponent was noticed by a human! Rather than starting with the bigger exponent, I decided to continue with the smaller one. Besides, another even bigger one could have been found had I started with 74,207,281, or still might be discovered.

Again, Marcel Martin's Primo worked as a program par execellence.

axn 2016-11-23 14:10

[QUOTE=paulunderwood;447615] 75,885,161.
75,885,161 [/QUOTE]

Ahem... 57,885,161

paulunderwood 2016-11-23 14:16

[QUOTE=axn;447616]Ahem... 57,885,161[/QUOTE]

Thanks for pointing out my error :blush:

Jayder 2016-11-23 23:09

Congratulations! That's an interesting choice of number.

Prime95 2016-11-24 01:55

I almost didn't read this addition to the thread - figuring it was just another bump in ECPP records.

However, your choice was pretty cool. Thumbs up!

All times are UTC. The time now is 03:53.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.