mersenneforum.org

mersenneforum.org (https://www.mersenneforum.org/index.php)
-   Data (https://www.mersenneforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=21)
-   -   COMPLETE!!!! Thinking out loud about getting under 20M unfactored exponents (https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=22476)

masser 2022-03-31 20:29

[QUOTE=chalsall;602942]The former just started (by the Colab TF'ers) and the latter is just about complete.

BTW... Does anyone have a block of say 0.01M that I could give to the Colab P-1'ers? We've been surprisingly successful in the last 24 hours! :tu:[/QUOTE]

Want to take 18.84M? I'm still a few days away from that subrange.

chalsall 2022-03-31 22:17

[QUOTE=masser;602960]Want to take 18.84M? I'm still a few days away from that subrange.[/QUOTE]

Yes, please! 204 candidates with yummy low bounds...

BTW... Wayne and I have been exchanging ideas about the [URL="https://www.gpu72.com/low/"]Low Composite Cleanup[/URL] thing. Amongst many other things, we need a catchy name... :wink:

So everyone knows, for some reason I hadn't noticed my dataset was corrupted for the first 1M range. Everything was listed as Factored; sadly, not (yet) correct. A spider is running to fix this.

Also, I need to finally stop hacking my comma rendering routine. 0.0M has once again shown my algorithm does not scale.

Lastly... TheJudger is BACK (at least for another batch)!!! :tu:

petrw1 2022-03-31 22:52

@Chalsall: You could also take 7.8M to help @Kruoli.

If I understand correctly he is focusing on sub-sub ranges over 200 ... and he's still in 7.87
I think you should be ok to take 7.81; 7.88; 7.89

I'm about 10 days from finishing all my ranges.

alpertron 2022-04-01 01:51

[QUOTE=chalsall;602971]Yes, please! 204 candidates with yummy low bounds...

BTW... Wayne and I have been exchanging ideas about the [URL="https://www.gpu72.com/low/"]Low Composite Cleanup[/URL] thing. Amongst many other things, we need a catchy name... :wink:

So everyone knows, for some reason I hadn't noticed my dataset was corrupted for the first 1M range. Everything was listed as Factored; sadly, not (yet) correct. A spider is running to fix this.

Also, I need to finally stop hacking my comma rendering routine. 0.0M has once again shown my algorithm does not scale.

Lastly... TheJudger is BACK (at least for another batch)!!! :tu:[/QUOTE]
There is a missing comma in the first line: 4,209961,589,561,203

In the last line (49.9M) there are 1214 numbers with low P-1. This means that 1980 - 1214 = 766 numbers have P-1 done with B2 > 100M. It is not clear why the average B2 is only 8,833,727. One of the numbers 1214 or 8,833,727 is incorrect.

kruoli 2022-04-01 08:32

[QUOTE=petrw1;602972]@Chalsall: You could also take 7.8M to help @Kruoli.

If I understand correctly he is focusing on sub-sub ranges over 200 ... and he's still in 7.87
I think you should be ok to take 7.81; 7.88; 7.89

I'm about 10 days from finishing all my ranges.[/QUOTE]

Yes, this is correct. I am only still on 7.87M because I already have the stage 1 files for all of them… I am going to skip forward to 7.85M after completing the current exponent and will finish up 7.87M's stage 1 files later.

petrw1 2022-04-01 19:25

[QUOTE=chalsall;602971]
Lastly... TheJudger is BACK (at least for another batch)!!! :tu:[/QUOTE]

And 1 more!

petrw1 2022-04-02 03:14

Devilish
 
My 3 highest ranges need 6 and 6 and 6 more factors...

and there are 13 ranges left.

Anyone superstitious?

axn 2022-04-02 12:02

[QUOTE=petrw1;603081]My 3 highest ranges need 6 and 6 and 6 more factors...

and there are 13 ranges left.

Anyone superstitious?[/QUOTE]

And build 13 just came out. Sound like good omen :devil:

chalsall 2022-04-02 20:17

[QUOTE=petrw1;603037]And 1 more![/QUOTE]

Yeah! A ***big*** batch! A bit of a shock, actually...

Just to be able to have things to assign for the Colab TF'ers, I've brought in [URL="https://www.gpu72.com/low/#44"]some composite candidates in 44M[/URL] to bring from 72 to 73 bits (working down).

Other suggestions are welcomed. But as far as I see things this project has been fully assigned, and the work just now needs to complete.

Well done Wayne (and, of course, et al)! Fun! :tu:

petrw1 2022-04-02 20:23

[QUOTE=chalsall;603134]Yeah! A ***big*** batch! A bit of a shock, actually...

Just to be able to have things to assign for the Colab TF'ers, I've brought in [URL="https://www.gpu72.com/low/#44"]some composite candidates in 44M[/URL] to bring from 72 to 73 bits (working down).

Other suggestions are welcomed. But as far as I see things this project has been fully assigned, and the work just now needs to complete.

Well done Wayne (and, of course, et al)! Fun! :tu:[/QUOTE]

44M seems like a good start.
I prefer the idea of working 1 bet level at a time starting at the highest range.
Another options is to work on whatever ranges has the least GhzDays/assignment.
You know: 44M at 72 bits = 22M at 71 bits = 11M at 70 bits, etc.

As I mentioned earlier once I am done my 4 ranges ... in about a week I will offer to help others.

masser 2022-04-03 13:59

Less than 243 to go!
 
1 Attachment(s)
Once upon a time, we completed a single range with 243 candidates. It only took 20 months! It's not going to take quite so long to find the last 239.


All times are UTC. The time now is 11:19.

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