I will do 75M - 76M.

[QUOTE=bloodIce;393093]I am doing some double-check in 989M-990M and reporting all factors found. 11% of all factors in the range are new. (second and third). There is no cheating from me and it will be over as of today (in couple of hours).

P.S.: The reason of this double-check is the issue with missed expos. I would like to see if it is a general problem. I was just too lazy to pick the unfactored only and scripted my worktodo.txt. Sorry, soon over, another 100 factors are coming.
P.S.S.: And what I can tell you is that the search of TJAOI is unfortunately non-systematic in respect to finished bit level. If TF55 is clear, then we should not see the factor 23897533126353583, as in [URL]http://www.mersenne.ca/exponent/989965729[/URL].[/QUOTE]

Check [URL]http://www.mersenne.org/M989965729[/URL]... mersenne.ca is not up to-date.

[QUOTE=petrw1;393163]Let me take the 72M range[/QUOTE]

10 hours ... 40% through the range ... 7 new factors so far.
Smallest just over 64 bits; largest just under 69 bits.
It's funny watching the classes [STRIKE]roll[/STRIKE] fly by when its doing 65-66 bit range.
Thruput dropped from about 510 to 490 GhzDays/Day.
I may have some configuration parameters too high for smaller bit ranges.???

[CODE]Manual testing 72401041 F 2015-01-22 14:27 0.0 218291136715616382799 0.2332
Manual testing 72382501 F 2015-01-22 14:27 0.0 342944142087508898161 0.1788
Manual testing 72363173 F 2015-01-22 14:27 0.0 544002637626766728503 0.7288
Manual testing 72349657 F 2015-01-22 14:27 0.0 315890959036043643191 0.0810
Manual testing 72337151 F 2015-01-22 14:27 0.0 34504309201726567649 0.0467
Manual testing 72237229 F 2015-01-22 10:27 0.0 364475248423316556359 0.2519
Manual testing 72180077 F 2015-01-22 10:27 0.0 210713469140678257513 0.2128[/CODE]

[QUOTE=petrw1;393180]10 hours ... 40% through the range ... 7 new factors so far.
Smallest just over 64 bits; largest just under 69 bits.
It's funny watching the classes [STRIKE]roll[/STRIKE] fly by when its doing 65-66 bit range.
[/quote]

It's kind of mesmerizing, isn't it? :D

[quote]Thruput dropped from about 510 to 490 GhzDays/Day.
I may have some configuration parameters too high for smaller bit ranges.???[/QUOTE]

Possibly, but it could just be a difference in the exponent range. The higher exponents get lower throughput. Also, the low bit depths are slightly less efficient, if I recall correctly.

Two so far... [URL="http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=75259127&full=1"]75259127[/URL] [U][COLOR=#0066cc][URL="http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=75661711&full=1"]75661711[/URL][/COLOR][/U]

[QUOTE=error;393179]Check [URL]http://www.mersenne.org/M989965729[/URL]... mersenne.ca is not up to-date.[/QUOTE]

True! In this case I am very happy to be wrong. Than, it appears that TJAOI search is systematic and exhaustive, at least in my sample of exponents (5000 or so). That is perfect, wish them more factors!

This looks like "fresh factoring", i.e. the expected number of factors like the range was never touched. It is not like few accidentally omissions. So, that guy's (sannerud) laptop is totally messed up, or he is an ordinary cheater. Just for curiosity I accessed the homonym web page. It looks like rubbish too...
Grrr...

[QUOTE=LaurV;393186]This looks like "fresh factoring", i.e. the expected number of factors like the range was never touched. It is not like few accidentally omissions. So, that guy's (sannerud) laptop is totally messed up, or he is an ordinary cheater. Just for curiosity I accessed the homonym web page. It looks like rubbish too...
Grrr...[/QUOTE]

Well, in the list of submitted work George provided, there were 15 factors out of 17,000 attempts. That's less than 10% of what's expected. I've already found 15 factors in about 1 THz-day of work. I have about 2850 GHz-days to go in rechecking all the assignments below 70M.

[QUOTE=LaurV;393186]So, that guy's (sannerud) laptop is totally messed up, or he is an ordinary cheater. [/QUOTE]

He had several other machines doing work, all were producing factors at the expected rate. Just a hardware problem.

[QUOTE=Prime95;393197]He had several other machines doing work, all were producing factors at the expected rate. Just a hardware problem.[/QUOTE]

Have you found any other problematic machines whose TF work needs to be checked?

[URL="http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=75318389&full=1"][FONT=Calibri][COLOR=#0066cc]75318389[/COLOR][/FONT][/URL] [URL="http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=75908453&full=1"][FONT=Calibri][COLOR=#0066cc]75908453[/COLOR][/FONT][/URL] [URL="http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=75675931&full=1"][FONT=Calibri][COLOR=#0066cc]75675931[/COLOR][/FONT][/URL] [URL="http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=75287159&full=1"][FONT=Calibri][COLOR=#0066cc]75287159[/COLOR][/FONT][/URL] [URL="http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=75661711&full=1"][FONT=Calibri][COLOR=#0066cc]75661711[/COLOR][/FONT][/URL] [URL="http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=75259127&full=1"][FONT=Calibri][COLOR=#0066cc]75259127[/COLOR][/FONT][/URL]

Found six factors so far...