I took 49204901 through to 58574039 inclusive from post #651. I.e. the remaining.

I took all the exponents mentioned in this 670ish post long thread and ran some scripts on the long list against the server.

These are the exponents that are still not double checked or factored and are not assigned to anyone:

[URL="http://hoegge.dk/mersenne/available.html"]available.html[/URL]

Most of these have probably been checked once by one of us, so make sure you do not double check your own exponent :)

Btw, I did not check the factor depth, I just added ,72,1 to all the DoubleCheck lines.

[QUOTE=ATH;419678]These are the exponents that are still not double checked or factored and are not assigned to anyone:
[CODE]35115601 DoubleCheck=35115601,72,1
35462837 DoubleCheck=35462837,72,1
35585257 DoubleCheck=35585257,72,1
35653117 DoubleCheck=35653117,72,1
35682739 DoubleCheck=35682739,72,1
35792423 DoubleCheck=35792423,72,1
35821501 DoubleCheck=35821501,72,1
35938541 DoubleCheck=35938541,72,1
35987977 DoubleCheck=35987977,72,1[/CODE][/QUOTE]

Taking the 35M ones.

Edit: BTW, all of these have already a DC, so this is going to be a tidy-up run...

[QUOTE=ric;419682]Taking the 35M ones.

Edit: BTW, all of these have already a DC, so this is going to be a tidy-up run...[/QUOTE]

Yes, I meant that the list is exponents that have not been [B][I]successfully[/I][/B] double checked. Many/most have probably been double+ checked.

[QUOTE=ATH;419685]Yes, I meant that the list is exponents that have not been [B][I]successfully[/I][/B] double checked. Many/most have probably been double+ checked.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for doing this... It has been a bit difficult keeping track of all the various lists...

But... I, personally, would prefer to work on new lists that Aaron generates, as he has an "inside view" of which DC/TC tests might give added weights to his heuristical queries.

So, Aaron, may I ask you to please generate another list which will help with this? Specifically, where two non-matching tests weren't marked with an error code, and will help with the weighting.

I'm jonesing for a dozen or so candidates, man.... :wink:

[QUOTE=chalsall;419852]So, Aaron, may I ask you to please generate another list which will help with this? Specifically, where two non-matching tests weren't marked with an error code, and will help with the weighting.

I'm jonesing for a dozen or so candidates, man.... :wink:[/QUOTE]

Sure... I was away from home the past week or so and I'd only been checking on things here and there, otherwise I would have done updated lists earlier.

List #1 here are the suspected bad that were just run once:
[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
38394739 3 0 1 3 1 3 DoubleCheck=38394739,71,1
38440489 5 0 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=38440489,71,1
38630609 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38630609,71,1
38668109 4 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38668109,71,1
40526009 4 1 5 1 4 2 DoubleCheck=40526009,72,1[/CODE]

List #2 here are the ones you asked about, where two mismatched runs have been done and it'll help us to know which is right and which is wrong... neither of the systems had much track record so we can't guess which might be correct.

There's a few new smaller ones but I included larger (over 60M) in this batch:
[CODE]exponent worktodo
36688441 DoubleCheck=36688441,71,1
36774611 DoubleCheck=36774611,71,1
36775007 DoubleCheck=36775007,71,1
41281717 DoubleCheck=41281717,72,1
47000533 DoubleCheck=47000533,72,1
61114351 DoubleCheck=61114351,73,1
61565461 DoubleCheck=61565461,74,1
62028917 DoubleCheck=62028917,74,1
62850059 DoubleCheck=62850059,73,1
62999207 DoubleCheck=62999207,74,1
63095869 DoubleCheck=63095869,74,1
63235961 DoubleCheck=63235961,74,1
63360337 DoubleCheck=63360337,74,1
64361849 DoubleCheck=64361849,74,1
64531097 DoubleCheck=64531097,74,1
66231401 DoubleCheck=66231401,75,1
66328091 DoubleCheck=66328091,75,1
66351167 DoubleCheck=66351167,75,1
66359831 DoubleCheck=66359831,75,1
69699101 DoubleCheck=69699101,75,1
69804967 DoubleCheck=69804967,74,1
69858181 DoubleCheck=69858181,75,1
70988641 DoubleCheck=70988641,75,1
70988857 DoubleCheck=70988857,75,1
71711869 DoubleCheck=71711869,75,1
71820457 DoubleCheck=71820457,75,1
73481047 DoubleCheck=73481047,74,1
78457663 DoubleCheck=78457663,74,1[/CODE]

I grabbed the six remaining under 60M, namely
[CODE]DoubleCheck=40526009,72,1
DoubleCheck=36688441,71,1
DoubleCheck=36774611,71,1
DoubleCheck=36775007,71,1
DoubleCheck=41281717,72,1
DoubleCheck=47000533,72,1
[/CODE]

[QUOTE=chalsall;419852]Thanks for doing this... It has been a bit difficult keeping track of all the various lists...

But... I, personally, would prefer to work on new lists that Aaron generates, as he has an "inside view" of which DC/TC tests might give added weights to his heuristical queries.

So, Aaron, may I ask you to please generate another list which will help with this? Specifically, where two non-matching tests weren't marked with an error code, and will help with the weighting.

I'm jonesing for a dozen or so candidates, man.... :wink:[/QUOTE]

That is fine. But that was all of Aaron's lists from this thread, those that hasn't been verified or factored yet.

[QUOTE=ATH;419918]That is fine. But that was all of Aaron's lists from this thread, those that hasn't been verified or factored yet.[/QUOTE]

I understand and appreciate that.

But... Aaron's queries use heuristics to (try to) determine the /likely/ "good vs. bad" in many cases.

Since many of my machines are (to use Aaron's nomenclature) "awesome" it makes more sense for my machines to explore unknown space than triple checking other "awesome" machines.

[QUOTE=chalsall;419981]I understand and appreciate that.

But... Aaron's queries use heuristics to (try to) determine the /likely/ "good vs. bad" in many cases.

Since many of my machines are (to use Aaron's nomenclature) "awesome" it makes more sense for my machines to explore unknown space than triple checking other "awesome" machines.[/QUOTE]

Correct. Right now there are something around 4800-5000 exponents that need a confirming triple-check.

We *could* go after all of them, starting with the ones we've worked on from this thread, but a more targeted approach seems more likely. 5000 exponents...that's a lot.

By going after the mismatches where the outcome of the triple-check is going to end up lumping one or the other of the systems onto the naughty list, it's more useful for our purposes.

There are a lot of those mismatch double-checks where we can already guess which one is the correct one, with pretty high accuracy, so I'm happy to use those guesses for now and then when they're eventually TC'd, we'll know for sure.

Regarding the TC's needed for exponents we've used on this thread, for the most part the people participating here have "awesome" systems. My current definition of awesome = 15 good, zero bad results. Sometimes I fiddle with those constants to see if any more potential "hot spots" erupt in the list of bad machines, but I don't want to get too carried away. I only want to use the truly error-free systems when assuming the other CPU in a mismatch is bad. :smile:

Meanwhile, I'll take a look at the stats today and see if any new numbers are ready for some love.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;419997]...Meanwhile, I'll take a look at the stats today and see if any new numbers are ready for some love.[/QUOTE]

Here's a list. Nothing new in the 3:1 bad to good range, but plenty of 2:1 bad/good. I've been doing quite a few of those myself and you don't get as many "hits" but you'll still find ones that were done wrong. Especially the ones that also have some "mis" (mismatches) besides the bad ones. Their mismatches are probably also bad but I wasn't able to guess accurately on them. Ditto if they have "sus" (suspect) results in their past...those are probably the ones that mismatched when they got double-checked.

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
36297901 2 1 4 0 2 2 DoubleCheck=36297901,71,1
36366073 2 1 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=36366073,71,1
36747049 2 1 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=36747049,71,1
36872399 2 0 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=36872399,71,1
37215223 4 2 5 2 4 3 DoubleCheck=37215223,71,1
37232641 2 1 8 2 7 3 DoubleCheck=37232641,72,1
37256237 2 1 4 0 2 2 DoubleCheck=37256237,71,1
37479971 2 1 8 2 7 3 DoubleCheck=37479971,71,1
37655243 4 2 5 2 4 3 DoubleCheck=37655243,71,1
37719949 2 1 8 2 7 3 DoubleCheck=37719949,71,1
37947289 2 1 4 1 4 1 DoubleCheck=37947289,71,1
38187307 2 1 8 2 7 3 DoubleCheck=38187307,71,1
38374529 2 0 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=38374529,71,1
38375933 4 2 7 0 7 0 DoubleCheck=38375933,71,1
38419127 2 0 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=38419127,71,1
38621369 8 4 3 1 2 2 DoubleCheck=38621369,71,1
38671361 5 2 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=38671361,71,1
38674651 2 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38674651,71,1
38705713 5 2 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=38705713,71,1
43254977 2 0 3 2 3 2 DoubleCheck=43254977,72,1
43697009 2 0 3 2 3 2 DoubleCheck=43697009,72,1
47151751 2 1 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=47151751,72,1
47678789 2 1 9 2 8 3 DoubleCheck=47678789,72,1
48959681 2 1 5 0 4 1 DoubleCheck=48959681,72,1
48961069 2 1 5 0 4 1 DoubleCheck=48961069,72,1
48962813 2 1 5 0 4 1 DoubleCheck=48962813,72,1
52941061 2 1 5 0 4 1 DoubleCheck=52941061,73,1
55633909 14 7 15 5 15 5 DoubleCheck=55633909,73,1
55743689 14 7 15 5 15 5 DoubleCheck=55743689,73,1
56599259 14 7 15 5 15 5 DoubleCheck=56599259,73,1
56700571 14 7 15 5 15 5 DoubleCheck=56700571,73,1
56841091 14 7 15 5 15 5 DoubleCheck=56841091,73,1
57188101 4 2 23 5 23 5 DoubleCheck=57188101,73,1
57234181 2 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=57234181,74,1
57448841 4 2 23 5 23 5 DoubleCheck=57448841,73,1
57515867 4 2 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=57515867,73,1
57517913 4 2 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=57517913,73,1
57637549 2 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=57637549,73,1
57652883 2 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=57652883,73,1
57664729 2 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=57664729,73,1
57766307 2 1 5 0 5 0 DoubleCheck=57766307,73,1
57984379 4 2 23 5 23 5 DoubleCheck=57984379,73,1
58391063 4 2 23 5 23 5 DoubleCheck=58391063,73,1
58601651 14 7 15 5 15 5 DoubleCheck=58601651,73,1
58616813 14 7 15 5 15 5 DoubleCheck=58616813,73,1
59116231 4 2 23 5 23 5 DoubleCheck=59116231,73,1
59192339 4 2 23 5 23 5 DoubleCheck=59192339,73,1
59809021 14 7 15 5 15 5 DoubleCheck=59809021,73,1[/CODE]