[QUOTE=rogue;407569]I've posted pfgw 3.710 (Windows only right now, Mac to soon follow). This fixes the trial division error that I reported a couple of weeks ago.

Note that I am considering discontinuing the distribution of 32-bit executables of pfgw. I'll be able to build them. I just appears that almost nobody is using them.[/QUOTE]

I use it occasionally on my old XP machine, not much works with 512M of ram.

Testing 89350*297^4659-1 with [CODE]pfgw64.exe -f0 -tp -q"89350*297^4659-1"[/CODE] returns that it is composite. Testing it with "-tc", however, returns that it is prime. Same for 104014*297^4844-1. Could someone confirm whether these are prime or not?

Edit: This is with 3.7.10 64-bit.

[CODE]./pfgw64 -i -V -tp -q"89350*297^4659-1" -a3
PFGW Version 3.7.7.64BIT.20130722.x86_Dev [GWNUM 27.11]


CPU Information (From Woltman v26 library code)
Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4770K CPU @ 3.50GHz
CPU speed: 3537.23 MHz, 4 cores
CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, Prefetch, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE4.1, SSE4.2
L1 cache size: 32 KB
L2 cache size: 256 KB, L3 cache size: 8 MB
L1 cache line size: 64 bytes
L2 cache line size: 64 bytes
TLBS: 64

Primality testing 89350*297^4659-1 [N+1, Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge]
Running N+1 test using discriminant 2, base 2+sqrt(2)
Special modular reduction using generic reduction AVX FFT length 12K, Pass1=256, Pass2=48 on 89350*297^4659-1
89350*297^4659-1 is prime! (1252.1987s+0.0154s)[/CODE]

I tried "-a2" but it failed. I will leave it up to you to do 104014*297^4844-1. :grin:

(I also ran [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=20454"]my own program[/URL] with a "Likely prime!" result :smile:)

[QUOTE=paulunderwood;410205][CODE]./pfgw64 -i -V -tp -q"89350*297^4659-1" -a3
PFGW Version 3.7.7.64BIT.20130722.x86_Dev [GWNUM 27.11]


CPU Information (From Woltman v26 library code)
Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4770K CPU @ 3.50GHz
CPU speed: 3537.23 MHz, 4 cores
CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, Prefetch, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE4.1, SSE4.2
L1 cache size: 32 KB
L2 cache size: 256 KB, L3 cache size: 8 MB
L1 cache line size: 64 bytes
L2 cache line size: 64 bytes
TLBS: 64

Primality testing 89350*297^4659-1 [N+1, Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge]
Running N+1 test using discriminant 2, base 2+sqrt(2)
Special modular reduction using generic reduction AVX FFT length 12K, Pass1=256, Pass2=48 on 89350*297^4659-1
89350*297^4659-1 is prime! (1252.1987s+0.0154s)[/CODE]

I tried "-a2" but it failed. I will leave it up to you to do 104014*297^4844-1. :grin:

(I also ran [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=20454"]my own program[/URL] with a "Likely prime!" result :smile:)[/QUOTE]

Much obliged!

I have updated pfgw to 3.8.0. There are only two changes:

1) Add Smarandache-Wellin functions (SmW and SmWp).
2) If using -od and -k options together, only output the decimal expansion to the log file and not to the console. There is a corresponding change to PRPNet that will use this for generic searches.

How does "validate factors" work? When I type, [code]pfgw factors.txt[/code] I get the following output:
[code]***WARNING! file factors.txt may have already been fully processed.

(4421*10^1007110-1)%6099704613355511 is Zero (0)
(4421*10^1008910-1)%3223703693683777 is Zero (0)
(4421*10^1023676-1)%566041625595317 is Zero (0)[/code]
What does it mean "[B]is Zero (0)[/B]"

BTW: where can I get version 3.8.0? There is still 3.7.10 available for download @ Sourceforge.

[QUOTE=Cruelty;416544]How does "validate factors" work? When I type, [code]pfgw factors.txt[/code] I get the following output:
[code]***WARNING! file factors.txt may have already been fully processed.

(4421*10^1007110-1)%6099704613355511 is Zero (0)
(4421*10^1008910-1)%3223703693683777 is Zero (0)
(4421*10^1023676-1)%566041625595317 is Zero (0)[/code]
What does it mean "[B]is Zero (0)[/B]"

BTW: where can I get version 3.8.0? There is still 3.7.10 available for download @ Sourceforge.[/QUOTE]

"is Zero" means that it has verified the factor. If you get any other result, then it is not a valid factor.

I have not posted it yet.

I reposted 3.8.0 with a change to support longer input lines, from 5000 characters to 5000000 characters. A 32-bit build is not included in what I have posted at source forge. If you absolutely need a 32-bit build, please let me know.

This version also supports the CE() function for Copeland-Erdos numbers. This combined with pixsieve should help anyone extend my search (if they desire).

When you run a N+1 test using "-tp" on a PRP and there is no factorization of N+1 it performs a Lucas PRP test:
(2^3464473-1)/604874508299177 is Lucas PRP!

In the documentation for -tp it says:
[CODE]If the factorisation is less then 33.33%, an F-strong test will be performed.

A.3.4 F-Strong test
This test is used when you use the -t option, and your factors don't reach
the magic 33.33%. It is a strong-primality test, and gives more certainty
than a Fermat test, but still is NOT a proof![/CODE]
Is an F-strong test the same as a Lucas PRP test? Is this a "normal", strong or extra strong Lucas test?

When you run this test just for the Lucas PRP test, I assume it "wastes" time trying the N+1 test first? If yes, is there a way to force it to just do the Lucas test immediately?



When you run a N-1 test using "-tm" on a PRP and there is no factorization of N-1 it returns:
(2^4187251-1)/72234342371519 is PRP!

Is this a Fermat PRP test or Strong PRP and for which base?

[QUOTE=ATH;435412]When you run a N+1 test using "-tp" on a PRP and there is no factorization of N+1 it performs a Lucas PRP test:
(2^3464473-1)/604874508299177 is Lucas PRP!

In the documentation for -tp it says:
[CODE]If the factorisation is less then 33.33%, an F-strong test will be performed.

A.3.4 F-Strong test
This test is used when you use the -t option, and your factors don't reach
the magic 33.33%. It is a strong-primality test, and gives more certainty
than a Fermat test, but still is NOT a proof![/CODE]
Is an F-strong test the same as a Lucas PRP test? Is this a "normal", strong or extra strong Lucas test?

When you run this test just for the Lucas PRP test, I assume it "wastes" time trying the N+1 test first? If yes, is there a way to force it to just do the Lucas test immediately?



When you run a N-1 test using "-tm" on a PRP and there is no factorization of N-1 it returns:
(2^4187251-1)/72234342371519 is PRP!

Is this a Fermat PRP test or Strong PRP and for which base?[/QUOTE]

Based upon the code, you need to use "-tc".

The "-tc" options gives:
[CODE]is Fermat and Lucas PRP![/CODE]

which means the N-1 options I was wondering about has to be Fermat PRP, I guess base 3?