[QUOTE=GAPa;455241]Today, I received a category 1 assignment.. so perhaps the issue has been resolved now?[/QUOTE]

In addition to the reply above, you might want to get in control and increase your setting for "days of work to queue" (menu item Option/Preferences) according to [URL="https://www.mersenne.org/thresholds/"]this page[/URL]

TL;DR put "4" in it, to be consistently served Cat 1's, "7" to be served Cat 2's, leave "3" or below, to continue as is

The 71,000,000 milestone
 

In some way the issue of the 71'000,000 milestone is not resolved.

The Prime Minister Residue is 42A93C867B552E__
while Albert Pettersson is 9C157058B13DB9__

Thus one of the two is not correct (or both :yucky: )

So I hope someone is able to take care of that by doing a triple check

[URL="https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=70723879&full=1"]https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=70723879&full=1[/URL]

[QUOTE=rudy235;455944]So I hope someone is able to take care of that by doing a triple check
[/QUOTE]

Running now, ETC 4 days

[QUOTE=rudy235;455944]In some way the issue of the 71'000,000 milestone is not resolved.

The Prime Minister Residue is 42A93C867B552E__
while Albert Pettersson is 9C157058B13DB9__

Thus one of the two is not correct (or both :yucky: )[/QUOTE]

It is not the double check milestone that reached 71M :-) There are many many more exponents below 71M with 2 residues that does not match.

[QUOTE=ATH;455946] There are many many more exponents below 71M with 2 residues that does not match.[/QUOTE]

I sort of suspected that. But in this specific case it is [U]the very last [/U]number that came in, the one where the residues do not match.:ick:

[QUOTE=rudy235;455949]I sort of suspected that. But in this specific case it is [U]the very last [/U]number that came in, the one where the residues do not match.:ick:[/QUOTE]

Statistically speaking, I would expect several thousands of tests below 71M to be wrong once the double checking gets to that point.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;456013]Statistically speaking, I would expect several thousands of tests below 71M to be wrong once the double checking gets to that point.[/QUOTE]

That is consistent with an approximately 1% failure rate.

[QUOTE=rudy235;456072]That is consistent with an approximately 1% failure rate.[/QUOTE]

debatable 7000./primepi(71000000) gives back 0.0016.... which is under 0.2% it would take roughly 42000./primepi(71000000) to give back just over 1% using pari/gp so roughly 42000 prime exponents would have to be wrong for that to occur. edit: at least prior to thinking about which can be easily factored etc. taking out the ones with 2p+1 as a factor of 2^p-1 gives about 40000 needed.

[QUOTE=science_man_88;456073]debatable 7000./primepi(71000000) gives back 0.0016.... which is under 0.2% it would take roughly 42000./primepi(71000000) to give back just over 1% using pari/gp so roughly 42000 prime exponents would have to be wrong for that to occur. edit: at least prior to thinking about which can be easily factored etc. taking out the ones with 2p+1 as a factor of 2^p-1 gives about 40000 needed.[/QUOTE]

Ok what I did was work backwards. There are roughly 500,000- 540,000 exponents that have not been verified or that have already two different residues.
[U]Several[/U] means more than two, but not many. So, let's say several thousand means a range from 3,000 to 5,000

Then for that to be true you need a failure rate of between 0.6 % to 1.0%

[QUOTE=rudy235;456076]Ok what I did was work backwards. There are roughly 500,000- 540,000 exponents that have not been verified or that have already two different residues.
[U]Several[/U] means more than two, but not many. So, let's say several thousand means a range from 3,000 to 5,000

Then for that to be true you need a failure rate of between 0.6 % to 1.0%[/QUOTE]

I didn't work out the math, but now in hindsight I should have gone with my gut instinct to say "tens of thousands" :smile:

[QUOTE=Madpoo;456081]I didn't work out the math, but now in hindsight I should have gone with my gut instinct to say "tens of thousands" :smile:[/QUOTE]

Thats the good thing of having a Forum. We get closer to the truth, one post at a time.

So what is the Percentage of Failure? (meaning by that that the first and the second result are not the same)