I have decided to take on the challenge of retesting the other bases >= 100. This is where being a programmer saves one a lot of time.

I wrote a program to parse the Riesel/Sierpinski pages to pull out the remaining k and search limits for each base. That program then created an ABC2 file for each conjecture and then ran PFGW to test up to n=1000. After that test was done, I modified that program to run srsieve up to 1e9 for each conjecture. I then merged the output into a single ABC file using the $a*$b^$c$d format. That took about two days, finishing last night. Post sieving I have 3.2 million and 3.4 million candidates to check out. Instead of using PFGW 3.3.5/3.3.6 to determine which numbers needed to be retested, I modified gwnum so that I could tell it to use the 3.3.5 method or 3.3.6 method to get the FFT size. I think wrote another program that read the ABC file and links with the modified gwnum to get both FFT sizes. If they differ, then that line gets kicked out to another file. That file will then be dumped into PRPNet.

I know that some people have double-checked bases between 100 and 800, so I will need to remove those tests from my final files before dumping them into PRPNet. I will know some time this weekend how many retests will be needed.

Now one should ask: Does Mark ever sleep? lol

Nice work Mark. :smile:

Although I won't start testing until next week, I do have some stats. On the Riesel side I have 81,761 retests. For Sierpinski, I have 53246. I have three conjectures that account for about 13,000 of the rests (about 10%). S200 is probably the worst as I have 2229 tests, all for 50,000 < n < 500,000.

I completed the double-check for all b >= 800. No primes to report. I have about 120,000 tests left for b >= 100. I will forego tests for S200, n > 25000. There are around 1300 tests in that range to be redone. None of the other bases have a retest for n > 120,000. I have no idea how long it will take, but I can say that I only have about 900 k/b/c combinations left, which is less than half of what I started with as I knocked off k/b/c with < 20 retests before tackling the bigger ones. If anyone wants to take S200, please let me know.

Presuming I don't find a missed prime, I would recommend suspending the double-check. I still think that it is possible that a prime was missed, but not feeling confident that I will find one. Not only am I double-checking CRUS work, I am also double-checking the Generalized Woodall search for n < 2000. I have found dozens of missed primes, which is really surprising to me. These were missed by PFGW 1.x, not PFGW 3.x. I also double-checked Generalized Cullens, but have not found any missing primes. I think that the older primes found by those projects might have been found by Proth, but I really don't know. The Generalized Cullen search is limited to b < 200. Only one of the missed primes for GW was for b < 200, so it is likely that the GC search didn't miss anything.

I have completed a double-check (a retest is probably more accurate) for all b >= 100 with the exception of S200, being done by CRGreatHouse. No primes were missed. I will not do anything for b < 100. If CRGreatHouse wants to abandon the retest of S200, he can do so. I don't expect to find any missed primes for anything not done.

Now back to S63...