I reached x=32,800 and found one new PRP:
329^32160+32160^329, 80954 digits.

I search now also in the for my reserved interval
40,001<=x<=50,000, 19<=y<=400 and found three new PRPs:
47^40182+40182^47, 67189 digits,
287^40210+40210^287, 98832 digits,
114^40495+40495^114, 83295 digits.

I reached x=41,000 and found two new PRPs:
91^40746+40746^91, 79824 digits,
328^40945+40945^328, 103013 digits

[QUOTE=firejuggler;387667]I was pretty sure It was already reserved. If no one volonteer before I come back from my trip ( mid december) ten i'll do it.[/QUOTE]It seems the range is still available :)

I reached x=42,000 and found one new PRP:
322^41507+41507^322, 104094 digits.

I reached x=36,000 and found two new PRPs:
302^35829+35829^302, 88857 digits,
214^35917+35917^214, 83702 digits.

I reached x=38,100 and found three new PRPs:
265^37614+37614^265, 91148 digits,
243^37738+37738^243, 90029 digits,
249^38030+38030^249, 91128 digits.

I reserve the interval:
50,001<=x<=500,000, 19<=y<=25.

That's quite a big interval. Good luck with it.

Note the changed URL of the page: [url]http://www.primefan.ru/xyyxf/primes.html#0[/url]

The interval 20,001<=x<=40,000, 201<=y<=400 is done, no new PRPs.
The last was 249^38030+38030^249, 91128 digits.

In the interval 40,001<=x<=50,000, 19<=y<=400 reached I x=48,695 and found two new PRPs:
286^45405+45405^286, 111532 digits.
317^48694+48694^317, 121787 digits.

In the interval 50,001<=x<=500,000, 19<=y<=25 reached I x=161,000, no new PRPs.

The interval 40,001<=x<=50,000, 19<=y<=400 is done, no new PRPs.

In the interval 50,001<=x<=500,000, 19<=y<=25 reached I x=186,000, no new PRPs.

I search also in the interval 12,501<=x<=13,000, 2001<=y<=x-1.
Please reserve this interval for me.
I read firejuggler searched the interval x=12501->15000, y=2501->3000.

I reached x=12,547 and found two new PRPs:
4114^12547+12547^4114, 45349 digits,
4354^12547+12547^4354, 45658 digits.

I found 3 PRPs on prptop, discovered by Hans Havermann.
13350^9739+9739^13350, 53247 digits,
14394^4993+4993^14394, 53235 digits,
13739^4600+4600^13739, 50323 digits.

[QUOTE=NorbSchneider;413431]I search also in the interval 12,501<=x<=13,000, 2001<=y<=x-1.
Please reserve this interval for me.[/QUOTE]Thank you Norbert. Please note that the lower bound for y is 3001 here, not 2001.

[QUOTE=NorbSchneider;413431]
I found 3 PRPs on prptop, discovered by Hans Havermann.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for noticing. When I first encountered Leyland primes last April, I got to wondering how many of the smallest ones were consecutive. I guessed at least 954 and it was my intention to verify that by making sure there were no additional primes in that range. The computation is ongoing and has several months to go. More recently, I got bored with the work and decided to divert a couple of my cores to check some smallish gaps between larger Leyland primes. This is how the 3 PRPs were discovered. Because I'm not limiting myself to XYYXF's reservation regime, I realize that I may be stepping on some toes. I apologize for that but it is unavoidable.

I reached x=12,650 and found 5 new PRPs:
9992^12549+12549^9992, 50192 digits,
11835^12584+12584^11835, 51257 digits,
8482^12591+12591^8482, 49464 digits,
9035^12622+12622^9035, 49932 digits,
3900^12643+12643^3900, 45402 digits.

I reached x=12,700 and found 5 new PRPs:
9737^12654+12654^9737, 50470 digits,
8530^12677+12677^8530, 49833 digits,
5755^12682+12682^5755, 47685 digits,
6213^12682+12682^6213, 48107 digits,
11008^12697+12697^11008, 51318 digits.

Today I found probable prime Leyland(12876,2447) — which was surprising because it should have been covered by XYYXF's reservation scheme. The slightly larger L(12617,2880) is currently being credited to me (presumably because I submitted some missing entries to the PRP-records site on behalf of others) but it was actually found by "firejuggler". I note also a previous confusion about the lower bound of y in L(x,y). Regardless, I am not taking anything for granted and my from-scratch recalculation of the smallest Leyland primes should reach L(12876,2447) in another two-and-a-half weeks. I have already diverted most of my resources to exploring subsequent intervals (between known Leyland primes).

[QUOTE=pxp;421368]Today I found probable prime Leyland(12876,2447) — which was surprising because it should have been covered by XYYXF's reservation scheme.[/quote]That's an old leak: [url]http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=387651&postcount=94[/url]

I'm slowly covering that window now...

I reached x=12,800 and found 2 new PRPs:
9328^12787+12787^9328, 50762 digits,
11542^12787+12787^11542, 51945 digits.

I have another five finds: L(13051,2448), L(13227,2200), L(13307,3442), L(13343,3150), and L(13371,3068). My [URL="http://chesswanks.com/num/a094133.txt"]indexing-the-Leyland-primes[/URL] project is now complete to L(11200,9267) which is #969 in OEIS A094133 [where L(3,2) is #2]. I hope to know #1000 by summer.

My Leyland primes list is now indexed to #986 L(12357,4862). The bottleneck to #1000 will be the gap between L(11572,9463) and L(12172,6713) which I will examine starting in two weeks. By distributing the search between four processors, I hope to complete it by the end of March.

(13896,2119) is also a PRP.

[QUOTE=XYYXF;387651]Now it would be nice to fill the gap 2000 < x <= 2500 for 12500 < y <= 15000 :-)[/QUOTE]The gap is filled with (14254,2227) and (14734,2397).

Hans, please check the updated page: [url]http://www.primefan.ru/xyyxf/primes.html#0[/url]

[QUOTE=XYYXF;426346]Hans, please check the updated page: [url]http://www.primefan.ru/xyyxf/primes.html#0[/url][/QUOTE]

Looks good. I see you picked up the three I had found earlier this month. One more today: L(13693,5212). I started the "bottleneck" gap mentioned in my last message. I'll have the next significant [I]indexing[/I] update by mid-March.

My [URL="http://chesswanks.com/num/a094133.txt"]indexing[/URL] is now up to #1022 L(14254,2227).

New PRPs are:
(13024,3285)
(13167,3436)
(13284,3335)
(12855,5032) - should be already found by Norbert
(13693,5212)
(13292,6867)

Right? :-)

I reached x=12,865 and found no new PRPs.
I found (12855,5032) later than Hans Havermann,
also he is the discoverer.

I found 2 more PRPs on prptop, discovered by Hans Havermann.
12943^6574+6574^12943, 49415 digits,
14038^4327+4327^14038, 51045 digits.

I search also PRPs of the form y^x-x^y.
I made a webpage to these PRPs, similar to Andrey's page
to the y^x+x^y PRPs. You can find the page at [URL="http://primfakt.atw.hu"]primfakt.atw.hu[/URL],
y^x-x^y PRPs exists much more than y^x+x^y PRPs.
For example to x= 5000 894 y^x-x^y and 426 y^x+x^y PRPs,
x=10000 1530 y^x-x^y and 787 y^x+x^y PRPs.
I have all the y^x-x^y PRPs to x=10800, and a few for higher x values.
Andrey, Hans or someone else, are you interesting to join me
searching the y^x-x^y PRPs?

I found 2 new PRPs:
7406^12879+12879^7406, 49837 digits,
8335^12882+12882^8335, 50510 digits.

Andrey, the file factortable_xy-yx_1_100.txt in [url]https://groups.yahoo.com/[/url]
neo/groups/ggnfs/files group contains all factorization for x < 101 as
in your results.txt. For 100 < x < 151 as in your results2.txt have I
nothing found to the y^x-x^y numbers.

To the y^x-x^y PRPs have I nothing new found in the above group,
you know y^x-x^y PRPs, thats are not on my webpage?

New PRP: L(15215,4762). I'm still working on eight gaps but that's down from as many as eighteen, having diverted processes to another project: [URL="http://chesswanks.com/seq/a037053.txt"]smallest prime containing a given number of zeros[/URL]. So I don't see myself doing y^x-x^y, Norbert. If anything, after I've had my fill of this diversion, I'll get back to advancing my indexing full on.

I reached x=12,900 and found 1 new PRP:
12356^12885+12885^12356, 52724 digits.

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000829457924"]L(13875,3712)[/URL]

[QUOTE=rogue;430074]I started sieving for x=11301 to x=12400. Unfortunately I only have one computer[/QUOTE]

[FONT=Arial][SIZE=2] Thank you Mark, the range is reserved for you. I also use only one computer to the
search.
[/SIZE][/FONT]

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000829739877"]L(15631,3816)[/URL]

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000829935942"]L(16375,2626)[/URL]

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000830411626"]L(13211,7468)[/URL]

Please check the updated page: [url]http://www.primefan.ru/xyyxf/primes.html#0[/url]

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000830487897"]L(13736,11949)[/URL]. My [URL="http://chesswanks.com/num/a094133.txt"]indexing[/URL] was recently upped to #1031 L(18661,390) but it will be a little while before I progress further: I haven't even started the next three gaps.

There are small gaps up to (20956,283). That milestone seems to be reachable :-)

[QUOTE=XYYXF;430684]There are small gaps up to (20956,283). That milestone seems to be reachable :-)[/QUOTE]

Absolutely. And there's no reason to stop there! Which accounts for my current engagement with two gaps beyond that. ;-)

[QUOTE=rogue;430739]FYI, I'm making a small change to the PRPNet server code so that server stats use y^x-x^y for the - form and x^y+y^x for the + form.[/QUOTE]

Who will host the PRPNet server so I can point my cores to it?

[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;430740]Who will host the PRPNet server so I can point my cores to it?[/QUOTE]

I am not hosting a public server as I run one on my network at home. It is easy enough to set up your own server if you are interested.

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000831104741"]L(14670,3083)[/URL]

I reached x=12,940 and found 1 new PRP:
12174^12937+12937^12174, 52854 digits.

Hans, how calculate you the Leyland# to a given (x,y) pair?
For example to (18661,390) how calculate you the Leyland# 90659013?
Which program/code does it? I would use this to the y^x-x^y PRPs also.

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000831778342"]L(13495,5154)[/URL]

[QUOTE=NorbSchneider;430859]Hans, how calculate you the Leyland# to a given (x,y) pair?
[/QUOTE]

When I started this about a year ago, I created a database of the first 331682621 Leyland numbers by their (x,y) designation. The hard part was getting them sorted by size (there are lots of near-equal bunches). In actual use I have broken that up into five (slightly overlapping) parts. So when I go through a gap I'm actually testing each (x,y) pair in sequence by its Leyland# index and when I find a prime I have the Leyland# directly.

The database couldn't tell me the Leyland# indices of the largest nine currently-known pairs so I wrote a program (in Mathematica — all my primality testing is done in Mathematica as well) that would do that. As with the previously-mentioned sorting problem there's a difficulty in balancing the needs of speed and accuracy but I eventually got the program where I felt it was working well and correctly, testing it on numbers in my database.

Since then, every time a new Leyland prime is discovered I run it through that Mathematica program (even though for [I]my[/I] finds I already know the index).

I reached x=12,970 and found 1 new PRP:
10821^12968+12968^10821, 52317 digits.

Mark the [URL="http://primfakt.atw.hu/"]y^x-x^y PRPs page[/URL] is updated, the new PRPs from you and me
are on the page now.

Hans, the Leyland# to a given (x,y) pair determine you also with a database
and a Mathematica program, thank for sharing this. I try to write a program
in C# to determine the "Leyland#" to the y^x-x^y PRPs.

[QUOTE=NorbSchneider;431514]I try to write a program in C# to determine the "Leyland#" to the y^x-x^y PRPs.[/QUOTE]

You might want to match your indices to [URL="https://oeis.org/A045575/b045575.txt"]this OEIS list[/URL].

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000832553712"]L(13137,5242)[/URL]

I reached x=12,985 and found 1 new PRP:
11434^12977+12977^11434, 52664 digits.

The interval 12,501<=x<=13,000, 3001<=y<=x-1 is done, no new PRPs.

In the interval 50,001<=x<=500,000, 19<=y<=25 reached I x=206,000, no new PRPs.

I continue the search in the interval 20,001<=x<=50,000, 401<=y<=800.
Please reserve this interval for me.

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000836232438"]L(14063,3408)[/URL]

Re: thread split
 

Note: I moved posts about y[SUP]x[/SUP]-x[SUP]y[/SUP] primes to the [URL="http://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=21240"]new thread of their own[/URL].

Some posts dealt both with - and + forms, so these were duplicated in both threads; no data was lost.

Thank you Serge :)

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000836269420"]L(14637,3172)[/URL]

[QUOTE=NorbSchneider;432114]The interval 12,501<=x<=13,000, 3001<=y<=x-1 is done, no new PRPs.

In the interval 50,001<=x<=500,000, 19<=y<=25 reached I x=206,000, no new PRPs.

I continue the search in the interval 20,001<=x<=50,000, 401<=y<=800.
Please reserve this interval for me.[/QUOTE]Done: [url]http://www.primefan.ru/xyyxf/primes.html#0[/url]

Please check the updated page :-)

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000836281740"]L(13206,4645)[/URL]

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000836414849"]L(13321,5388)[/URL]

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000836527238"]L(13527,4168)[/URL]

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000836619461"]L(13318,5527)[/URL]: If anyone is getting annoyed by my posting these as I find them, let me know. I've got a good start on doing all gaps less than L(12310,11641). As these finish, I'll switch over to the additional gaps less than L(19312,429).

Please continue to report them :-)

[QUOTE=rogue;377674]I don't know why --platform doesn't work so I need to investigate that, but -f should now work to change the platform (although I haven't tested it).[/QUOTE]
--platform still doesn't work
Neither does -f1
[CODE]$ ./xyyxsievecl64.exe -f1 -x100 -X200 -y3000 -Y4000 -P2e6 -t2 -s3000 -S+ -b32 -oxyyx.pfgw -f01
xyyxsievecl v1.0.3, a GPU program to find factors numbers of the form x^y+y^x
Quick elimination of terms info (in order of check):
50551 because the term is even
9478 because x and y have a common divisor
28375 because the term is divisible by a prime < 100
Platform 0 has no available devices. Here is a list of platforms and devices:List of available platforms and devices
Platform 0 is a Intel(R) Corporation Intel(R) OpenCL, version OpenCL 1.2
No devices
Platform 1 is a NVIDIA Corporation NVIDIA CUDA, version OpenCL 1.2 CUDA 8.0.5
Device 0 is a NVIDIA Corporation GeForce GTX 570
$ ./xyyxsievecl64.exe -f1 -x100 -X200 -y3000 -Y4000 -P2e6 -t2 -s3000 -S+ -b32 -oxyyx.pfgw --platform=1
xyyxsievecl v1.0.3, a GPU program to find factors numbers of the form x^y+y^x
Quick elimination of terms info (in order of check):
50551 because the term is even
9478 because x and y have a common divisor
28375 because the term is divisible by a prime < 100
Platform 0 has no available devices. Here is a list of platforms and devices:List of available platforms and devices
Platform 0 is a Intel(R) Corporation Intel(R) OpenCL, version OpenCL 1.2
No devices
Platform 1 is a NVIDIA Corporation NVIDIA CUDA, version OpenCL 1.2 CUDA 8.0.5
Device 0 is a NVIDIA Corporation GeForce GTX 570[/CODE]

Try this one. I found a bug where the selected platform was being reset to 0.

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000837971841"]L(13537,3948)[/URL]

[QUOTE=rogue;433011]Try this one. I found a bug where the selected platform was being reset to 0.[/QUOTE]
Thanks!
This binary works fine for "+" side but does nothing for the "-" side:
[CODE]$ ./xyyxsievecl64.exe -S- -x 10 -X 20 -y 4000 -Y 70000 -p 3 -P 1e13 -oxy-yx-50m.out -b32 -s3000 -f1
xyyxsievecl v1.0.4, a GPU program to find factors numbers of the form x^y+y^x
Switching x and y for optimization
Quick elimination of terms info (in order of check):
0 because the term is even
0 because x and y have a common divisor
0 because the term is divisible by a prime < 100
Sieve started: (cmdline) 3 <= p < 10000000000000 [COLOR=Red]with 0 terms[/COLOR]
(and then works really hard though it has nothing in the sieve!!)
p=3166487141, 6.035K p/sec, 0 factors found at 0 secs/factor, 0.35 CPU cores, 0.0% done. ETA 07 May 14:02

In comparison:
$ ./xyyxsievecl64.exe -S+ -x 10 -X 20 -y 4000 -Y 70000 -p 3 -P 1e13 -oxy-yx-50p.out -b32 -s3000 -f1
xyyxsievecl v1.0.4, a GPU program to find factors numbers of the form x^y+y^x
Quick elimination of terms info (in order of check):
363006 because the term is even
64532 because x and y have a common divisor
233691 because the term is divisible by a prime < 100
Sieve started: (cmdline) 3 <= p < 10000000000000 with 64782 terms
1078739 | 10^25157+25157^10
1090423 | 10^14839+14839^10
1005593 | 11^5532+5532^11
1048891 | 10^60093+60093^10
1039111 | 11^13738+13738^11
.......
[/CODE]
?

This should fix that. I had a piece of code that tried to prevent the ranges of x and y from overlapping. It was coded incorrectly, so I removed it. It will be up to the user to not do something stupid.

It seems to work now, thanks!

Further tests show that something is not right, though.
Debug example:
[CODE]$ ./xyyxsievecl64.exe -x11 -X11 -y166212 -Y166212 -S- -f1 -P1e10
xyyxsievecl v1.0.5, a GPU program to find factors numbers of the form x^y+y^x
Quick elimination of terms info (in order of check):
0 because the term is even
0 because x and y have a common divisor
[COLOR=Red]1 because the term is divisible by a prime < 100[/COLOR]
Sieve started: (cmdline) 0 <= p < 10000000000 [COLOR=DarkRed]with 0 terms[/COLOR]
CTRL-C accepted. Please wait for threads to completed.
Thread 1 has completed 0 of 2 iterations
Sieve interrupted: 3 <= p < 10000000000 529920 primes tested
Clock time: 6.46 seconds at 82001 p/sec. Factors found: 0
Processor time: 2.40 sec. (0.09 init + 2.31 sieve).
Seconds spent in CPU and GPU: 0.37 (cpu), 11.66 (gpu)
Percent of time spent in CPU vs. GPU: 3.06 (cpu), 96.94 (gpu)
CPU/GPU utilization: 0.37 (cores), 1.00 (devices)
Percent of GPU time waiting for GPU: 40.23[/CODE]1. 11^166212-166212^11 is not divisible by small factor (one can check with PFGW!) yet it is removed
2. Why does the sieve proceed to sieve _[COLOR=DarkRed]after[/COLOR]_ it knows that it has 0 terms in the sieve?!

[SPOILER]A possible "answer" to issue #1 is that 29 | 11^166212[COLOR=Red][B]+[/B][/COLOR]166212^11, which of course doesn't matter for the [COLOR=Red]-[/COLOR] side.[/SPOILER]

I appreciate your testing Serge. The attached should address both of those issues. The issue with finding the factor < 100 was due to a numeric overflow because one of your x/y values exceeded 2^15.5. That is now fixed. I don't know if anyone has been using this program for x/y that are that large, but if so, then they might need to retest their range again.

Thank you.
I am in the process of testing a chunk of data and will compare to Multisieve'd chunk (which is also known to be suspect; I think you wrote about that). It is by running this comparison and drilling down to separate examples of mismatches that I have found that previous example (only one of many). I will report after the sieve progresses far enough that it will be expected to produce just a subset of what Multisieve produced.

[QUOTE=Batalov;433104]Thank you.
I am in the process of testing a chunk of data and will compare to Multisieve'd chunk (which is also known to be suspect; I think you wrote about that). It is by running this comparison and drilling down to separate examples of mismatches that I have found that previous example (only one of many). I will report after the sieve progresses far enough that it will be expected to produce just a subset of what Multisieve produced.[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately MultiSieve will miss factors and xyyxsievecl will remove candidates incorrectly. Fortunately xyyxsievecl will log factors so you can double-check those with pfgw.

Alas, xyyxsievecl64.exe v 1.0.6 also behaves unexpectedly.

The log file is large but upon analysis only contains factors up to a few million (they are not sorted by p, which is fine - this is a multi-threaded application), and then factors above ~3.1e9 and if the application is left to its own devices, p very slowly grows (no more huge leaps forward). Further analysis confirms that factors are valid, but that no sieving occurred between 3932129 < p < 3162375959 . For that, I have compared earlier smaller sieve (done with Multisieve) and checked the mismatches: the Multisieve'd file had a few lines more (and they indeed had rare factors above 3.1e9) but xyyxclsieve'd file had many more lines which upon check with GP have relatively small factors in the 3932129 < p < 3162375959 gap.

Here is my detailed post-mortem:
[CODE][B]./xyyxsievecl64.exe -S- -x 10 -X 50 -y 29000 -Y 300000 -p 3 -P 1e13 -oxy-yx-50m.out -b32 -s3000 -f1[/B]

[COLOR=Blue]... stdout after a few hours looked like[/COLOR]
Thread 2 has completed 699614 of 993263 iterations
3418687241 | 288888^11-11^288888
3418947209 | 254946^13-13^254946
p=3418739089, 322.6 p/sec, 994311 factors found at 23 secs/factor, 0.25 CPU cores, 0.0% done. ETA 28 Jun 06:33
3419618533 | 41862^37-37^41862
3419563187 | 64583^12-12^64583
3419586013 | 151731^34-34^151731
Thread 2 has completed 708625 of 993263 iterations
p=3419415253, 356.0 p/sec, 994314 factors found at 22 secs/factor, 0.25 CPU cores, 0.0% done. ETA 30 Jun 22:58
3420401519 | 142459^20-20^142459
CTRL-C accepted. Please wait for threads to completed.
Thread 1 has completed 645563 of 993263 iterations
3420383999 | 190741^20-20^190741
Thread 2 has completed 165122 of 993263 iterations
2 threads didn't stop after 10 minutes
Thread 0: Worker Status: 4 Sieve Status: 3
Thread 1: Worker Status: 4 Sieve Status: 3
[B]
$ head xyyxsieve.log[/B]
5 | 29001^16-16^29001
29 | 29001^20-20^29001
5 | 29001^26-26^29001
31 | 29001^38-38^29001
5 | 29001^46-46^29001
3 | 29002^11-11^29002
3 | 29002^13-13^29002
7 | 29002^15-15^29002
3 | 29002^19-19^29002
13 | 29002^21-21^29002
...
[B]$ awk '$1<14000000' xyyxsieve.log |sort -n |tail[/B]
3931393 | 45746^37-37^45746
3931481 | 114715^14-14^114715
3931687 | 158045^32-32^158045
3931687 | 223748^29-29^223748
3931721 | 218282^35-35^218282
3931801 | 215368^39-39^215368
3931861 | 255704^19-19^255704
3932063 | 112768^27-27^112768
3932119 | 124718^39-39^124718
3932129 | 37965^44-44^37965

[COLOR=Blue]# then immediate leap to ...[/COLOR]

[B]$ awk '$1>4000000' xyyxsieve.log |sort -n |head[/B]
3162375959 | 246854^25-25^246854
3162378119 | 164292^17-17^164292
3162418769 | 209003^44-44^209003
3162425921 | 173201^50-50^173201
3162563959 | 286509^20-20^286509
3162599239 | 100591^20-20^100591
3162642233 | 96480^43-43^96480
3162729233 | 163034^41-41^163034
3162784357 | 56157^26-26^56157
3163215511 | 268353^26-26^268353


[B]$ cat xyyxsieve.ckpt[/B]
App: 3 3417388769 10000000000000 23823360 33787046877 24488718148540015 67113612774 132938061532
XYYXSieveApp: 994306
[B]$

# Let's check validity of factors with GP[/B]

[COLOR=Blue]======================tr.pl======================
#!/usr/bin/perl -w

while (<>) {
s/\s+$//;
/(\d+) \| (\d+)\^(\d+)-(\d+)\^(\d+)/;
die if ($2 ne $5 || $3 ne $4);
print "if(Mod($2,$1)^$3!=Mod($3,$1)^$2,print(\"$_\"))\n";
}
======================tr.pl======================[/COLOR]

[B]$ head xyyxsieve.log |perl tr.pl[/B]
if(Mod(29001,5)^16!=Mod(16,5)^29001,print("5 | 29001^16-16^29001"))
if(Mod(29001,29)^20!=Mod(20,29)^29001,print("29 | 29001^20-20^29001"))
if(Mod(29001,5)^26!=Mod(26,5)^29001,print("5 | 29001^26-26^29001"))
if(Mod(29001,31)^38!=Mod(38,31)^29001,print("31 | 29001^38-38^29001"))
if(Mod(29001,5)^46!=Mod(46,5)^29001,print("5 | 29001^46-46^29001"))
if(Mod(29002,3)^11!=Mod(11,3)^29002,print("3 | 29002^11-11^29002"))
if(Mod(29002,3)^13!=Mod(13,3)^29002,print("3 | 29002^13-13^29002"))
if(Mod(29002,7)^15!=Mod(15,7)^29002,print("7 | 29002^15-15^29002"))
if(Mod(29002,3)^19!=Mod(19,3)^29002,print("3 | 29002^19-19^29002"))
if(Mod(29002,13)^21!=Mod(21,13)^29002,print("13 | 29002^21-21^29002"))
[B]$ head xyyxsieve.log |perl tr.pl |gp -q[/B]

[B]$ cat xyyxsieve.log |perl tr.pl |gp -q[/B]

[COLOR=Blue]#--> all factors are valid[/COLOR]
[/CODE]

I'll see what I can figure out.

I just cannot test this with my Macs since it appears that Apple wants everyone to use Metal instead of OpenCL and the Windows boxes I have are woefully underpowered WRT the GPU. I'll write a CPU only version for the command line.

If you publish the source (neatness doesn't matter all too much, not to me at least), I could try to debug / recompile...

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000838327311"]L(13260,4523)[/URL] & [URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000838327449"]L(13311,4558)[/URL]

[QUOTE=Batalov;433264]If you publish the source (neatness doesn't matter all too much, not to me at least), I could try to debug / recompile...[/QUOTE]

Have at it.

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000838568511"]L(14415,3274)[/URL]

Hopefully I collected them all: [url]http://www.primefan.ru/xyyxf/primes.html#primes[/url]

[QUOTE=XYYXF;433696]Hopefully I collected them all: [url]http://www.primefan.ru/xyyxf/primes.html#primes[/url][/QUOTE]

I'm in there 39 times which matches my Leyland prime output. My [URL="http://chesswanks.com/num/a094133.txt"]indexing[/URL] has advanced slightly to #1033 L(13260,4523). This sets up a big jump in three days.

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000838677548"]L(13174,4857)[/URL]

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000838682610"]L(13889,3138)[/URL]

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000838760610"]L(14162,3681)[/URL] & [URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000838780107"]L(13386,5891)[/URL]

[URL="http://chesswanks.com/num/a094133.txt"]Indexing[/URL] is now complete up to #1065 L(22300,181).

Indexing is now complete up to #1084 L(20956,283).

I'm hoping to reach #1100 before the end of June — which assumes finding [I]six[/I] new Leyland primes smaller than L(16495,1684). Here's [I]one[/I]: [URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000838997085"]L(13981,5110)[/URL].

I reached x=20,800 and found 4 new PRP:
581^20068+20068^581, 55472 digits,
789^20158+20158^789, 58400 digits,
507^20572+20572^507, 55648 digits,
427^20614+20614^427, 54224 digits.

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000839006521"]L(13300,7527)[/URL] & [URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000839024387"]L(13804,5755)[/URL]

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000839317629"]L(14419,3960)[/URL] & [URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000839440042"]L(15436,2441)[/URL]

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000839616287"]L(13200,9247)[/URL] & [URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000839794081"]L(13732,6465)[/URL]

Index has reached #1085. I should have a slightly more substantial advance tomorrow.

[URL="http://chesswanks.com/num/a094133.txt"]Index[/URL] has reached #1089 L(12787,11542).

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000839843187"]L(15214,2763)[/URL]
[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000839865006"]L(13145,10024)[/URL]
[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000839865170"]L(13735,6304)[/URL]
[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000839870220"]L(15692,2205)[/URL]

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000840027643"]L(15146,2781)[/URL]
[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000840120944"]L(13529,7662)[/URL]

Index has reached #1096.

(17691,1508) looks like a large milestone :)

[QUOTE=XYYXF;435727](17691,1508) looks like a large milestone :)[/QUOTE]

When I found L(12876,2447) in early January it was the culmination of primality-checking the first 75.5 million Leyland numbers. With the addition of another computer, here I am five months later and I'm at 104.5 million. So, getting to 118.5 million in the coming months does not seem unreasonable.

[URL="http://chesswanks.com/num/a094133.txt"]Index[/URL] has reached #1098 L(13529,7662).

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000840646597"]L(13810,6909)[/URL]
[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000840848100"]L(14256,5077)[/URL]

[QUOTE=XYYXF;433696]Hopefully I collected them all: [url]http://www.primefan.ru/xyyxf/primes.html#primes[/url][/QUOTE]

I just noticed it hasn't been updated since. More importantly, the y-value of my L(14415,3274) was entered incorrectly.

Thanks for the check. I'll fix that at the next update.

[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000840877426"]L(13774,6963)[/URL]
[URL="http://factordb.com/index.php?id=1100000000840926173"]L(15271,2986)[/URL]