A B.Cereus case of assignment poaching...
 

I requested 50 assignments via GPU to 72 last week, and completed them today. However, one of the results was rejected:

[CODE][Sat Mar 09 09:33:49 2013]
UID: ixfd64/andromeda, M61578079 has a factor: 8520992029041896962793 [TF:72:73*:mfaktc 0.20 barrett76_mul32_gs]
[Sat Mar 09 09:33:49 2013]
UID: ixfd64/andromeda, found 1 factor for M61578079 from 2^72 to 2^73 (partially tested) [mfaktc 0.20 barrett76_mul32_gs]
[Sat Mar 09 11:54:58 2013][/CODE]

PrimeNet accepted the other 49 without issues.

The 30-day expiration has supposedly been disabled, so there shouldn't be any assignment overlap. I looked up the exponent on [url]http://mersenne.ca[/url] and noticed that someone by the name of "Just factoring!" had already submitted the factor. According to the top producers list, this user has only "completed" 28 TF assignments.

It's not really a big deal because 1) the factor would have taken just a few minutes to turn up, 2) GPU to 72 still credits me as the discoverer and 3) I could easily get a load of "successes" credited to my name if I wanted to.

That having been said, I'd still like to know what happened. Has "Just factoring!" discovered a new integer factorization algorithm? Or perhaps he wasn't aware of GPU to 72, and decided to randomly pick exponents to TF? Anyone have an idea?

two days ago someone else alerted us to "just factoring". I don't recall reading a conclusion.

But you have confirmed the poaching. Accidental or not...

What if they only poach exponents with factors?

:omg:

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;332930]What if they only poach exponents with factors?
[/QUOTE]

How would such a person know in advance to run only those exponents?

BTW: The results as shown do not give indication of duplicate results: i.e. Error 40, or some such.

rofl
 

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;332930]What if they only poach exponents with factors?

:omg:[/QUOTE]
Saved my day. :missingteeth:

maybe s/he took a bunch of expo, ran one or two bitlevel and returned only the one with a factor?

[QUOTE=firejuggler;332938]maybe s/he took a bunch of expo, ran one or two bitlevel and returned only the one with a factor?[/QUOTE]

Yeah. Could be. Stupid and ass-holy, though. :no:

[QUOTE=swl551;332926]two days ago someone else alerted us to "just factoring". I don't recall reading a conclusion.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=firejuggler;332938]maybe s/he took a bunch of expo, ran one or two bitlevel and returned only the one with a factor?[/QUOTE]
I think that when some one mentioned 'just factoring' earlier, I checked Recent Results and found a no factor result, if memory serves.:paul:

His/her YTD TF: 28 Attempts; 1 Factor.
Not a big player (yet?) And not just factors

Here's someone (else?) who has racked up 3200 GHz-days in the last 2 weeks, most of it by manual testing: tomtr.

I came across this as an TF result was rejected. The assignment was given on March 10 and completed on March 11.

[QUOTE=tcharron;332991]Here's someone (else?) who has racked up 3200 GHz-days in the last 2 weeks, most of it by manual testing: tomtr.

I came across this as an TF result was rejected. The assignment was given on March 10 and completed on March 11.[/QUOTE]

Can you please provide the exponent?

It's not a good idea to reveal the exponent while you work it, but many of us are very interested in documenting poachers....