[QUOTE=endless mike;430690]Taking the above 15
[/QUOTE]

Finished. Eleven out of fifteen needing triple check, not too bad.

[CODE]38620357 Needed triple check, triple check confirmed
38636827 Needs triple check, assigned
38816809 Needs triple check
39093833 Verified
39138989 Needs triple check
39158261 Needed triple check, self verified, quad check confirmed
39258337 Verified
39285943 Needs triple check
39428419 Verified
45364643 Verified
46172479 Needs triple check
46175693 Needs triple check
46742713 Needs triple check
46964263 Needs triple check
47035271 Needs triple check[/CODE]

Took the last 4
 

[CODE]78409057 6 1 24 0 24 0 DoubleCheck=78409057,75,1
78409061 6 1 24 0 24 0 DoubleCheck=78409061,75,1
78409361 6 1 24 0 24 0 DoubleCheck=78409361,75,1
78483023 6 1 27 0 27 0 DoubleCheck=78483023,75,1[/CODE]

[QUOTE=endless mike;431820]Finished. Eleven out of fifteen needing triple check, not too bad.

[CODE]38620357 Needed triple check, triple check confirmed
38636827 Needs triple check, assigned
38816809 Needs triple check
39093833 Verified
39138989 Needs triple check
39158261 Needed triple check, self verified, quad check confirmed
39258337 Verified
39285943 Needs triple check
39428419 Verified
45364643 Verified
46172479 Needs triple check
46175693 Needs triple check
46742713 Needs triple check
46964263 Needs triple check
47035271 Needs triple check[/CODE][/QUOTE]

I've queued all of the above needing another check and not assigned.

@MarkRose,
Just out of curiosity, why have you recently done so many LL tests on small (3M) exponents?
They were already TCed/QCed, Any sort of QA run?

Just for fun. Every result was a triple check if disregarding self-verified results. Every exponent between 3000K and 3010K is now triple checked.

I'm surprised anyone noticed.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;431855]

I'm surprised anyone noticed.[/QUOTE]

Very often reality surpasses fiction :wink:

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;431855]Just for fun. Every result was a triple check if disregarding self-verified results. Every exponent between 3000K and 3010K is now triple checked.

I'm surprised anyone noticed.[/QUOTE]

I'd been tempted to carry on some of my (I'm sure useless) triple checks of the smaller exponents too... I think I got up to everything < 2M before I moved on to looking at the bad computers, and then that caught my eye as a fun project. :smile:

The small exponent triple-checking was mostly just me confirming old code... yeah, they'd been double-checked, but what if, just on some extreme chance, some bug in an old app caused it to spit out some weird (but same) residue each time? Long shot, and until you look, you don't know what you'll find. :smile:

[QUOTE=Madpoo;431865]I'd been tempted to carry on some of my (I'm sure useless) triple checks of the smaller exponents too... I think I got up to everything < 2M before I moved on to looking at the bad computers, and then that caught my eye as a fun project. :smile:

The small exponent triple-checking was mostly just me confirming old code... yeah, they'd been double-checked, but what if, just on some extreme chance, some bug in an old app caused it to spit out some weird (but same) residue each time? Long shot, and until you look, you don't know what you'll find. :smile:[/QUOTE]

I thought of continuing all the triple checks up to 3M-4M. I could probably do it in about two months.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;431876]I thought of continuing all the triple checks up to 3M-4M. I could probably do it in about two months.[/QUOTE]

The point being?

[QUOTE=chalsall;431877]The point being?[/QUOTE]

Thought about it. Haven't decided to. There isn't much point to doing it :)

[QUOTE=chalsall;431877]The point being?[/QUOTE]

Probably the same reason I was doing it...just checking up on old code/old results/old people. :smile:

Quixotic effort, in all likelihood, but since the computing cost was relatively low (for the tests I did, under 2M) it wasn't a big deal either way. And hey, now we know: those old results were actually decent.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;431963]Quixotic effort, in all likelihood, but since the computing cost was relatively low (for the tests I did, under 2M) it wasn't a big deal either way. And hey, now we know: those old results were actually decent.[/QUOTE]

Hey, your and Mark's (et al) kit/time/money. Rock your boat! :smile:

In the future compute will be so fast we can triple check everything we've already done.

Perhaps the future is now.... :wink:

It will probably be fastest to triple check everything after we've found all the primes.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;431782]...Has anything interesting come from the mandatory DC work change, by the way?[/QUOTE]

Probably too soon to tell. I'll wait and look for changes to these graphs:
[URL="http://www.mersenne.org/primenet/graphs.php"]http://www.mersenne.org/primenet/graphs.php[/URL]

I run a daily query to look for exponents that need a triple-check... I guess in theory when more machines are double-checking, I should start seeing more that need a triple-check (about 5% of double-checks should mismatch, if the past is any guide).

The trouble there is that AirSquirrels and I are actively attacking the triple-check list, so it's also going down as a result. :smile: Currently ~ 2800 unassigned exponents needing triple-checks, so we'll see.

The other way to know is when we start finding more, previously unknown, bad machines, as a result of those increased double-checks. Even when it's a match, that means *two* machines just got one more "good" result notched up for them, which I use to help guess the winner/loser in a mismatch, so that helps too.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;431973]It will probably be fastest to triple check everything after we've found all the primes.[/QUOTE]

:davar55:

[QUOTE=Madpoo;431995]The other way to know is when we start finding more, previously unknown, bad machines, as a result of those increased double-checks. Even when it's a match, that means *two* machines just got one more "good" result notched up for them, which I use to help guess the winner/loser in a mismatch, so that helps too.[/QUOTE]

It would be nice to prioritize DC assignments to give out DC for machines that have never had a result DC'ed. That would expose the historically bad machines quicker. Do know how many machines have returned an LL result without having any of its LL results verified?

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;432002]It would be nice to prioritize DC assignments to give out DC for machines that have never had a result DC'ed. That would expose the historically bad machines quicker. Do know how many machines have returned an LL result without having any of its LL results verified?[/QUOTE]

I support that idea.

I don't have the time at the moment to manually reserve and then place onto my machines specific assignments.

But if there was a button somewhere I could click which said "Use my machines to check possibly bad machines" I would click it.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;432002]It would be nice to prioritize DC assignments to give out DC for machines that have never had a result DC'ed. That would expose the historically bad machines quicker. Do know how many machines have returned an LL result without having any of its LL results verified?[/QUOTE]

In overall terms, just looking at each CPU (both v4/legacy and v5 data) there are 21,162 systems that have never had a verified or bad result... it's just kinda hanging out, waiting to see which way it goes.

Of those, 932 have a mismatch and/or suspect result, but it's pending a triple-check.

6,133 of the 21,162 have just a single unknown exponent, so it's not really worth a preemptive check on them because one way or another, when their solo exponent is checked, that's it, end of the line. Another 4,013 have just 2 unknowns, and the case could be made it's not worth it for those either... if you do test one of them and it's bad, yeah, there's one more you can check to see if it's bad too, but there are bigger fish to fry.

So it's really the 10,153 that have 3+ unknowns, and even then I'd probably start at the top of list (by # of unknowns) and work down, because if someone has 20 unknowns and they started turning up bad, well, that's more interesting than someone with only 5.

It's surprising... there are machines out there that have 100-200+ unknown results and zero bad, zero good. Those are "newer", as in the exponents they did are 50M+ in size, so they're ahead of the DC group.

It just dawned on me that another way to see how the extra DC assignments impact that count of "machines with no good/no bad". When those active systems start doing DC work, we should *hopefully* see "good" results being tallied by them. Or, they mismatch and at least I can see "oh, they have zero good/zero bad, but they do have a mismatch or two...that's curious".

I noted with some amusement that in 74 instances, a machine with zero bad/zero good had a mismatch, but my "guess" for which one was correct (based in this case on the other machine's history) managed to give those 74 systems at least one bad/good result. I really should do my own triple-check on those guesses (if I wasn't the one doing the double-check) to confirm my guess.

For example, in one case a CPU had 5 mismatches, and my algorithm guessed that 3 of them were bad. Two other mismatches were unable to make a prediction, and there's one solo-checked exponent. (no wonder, those 3 "guesses" were because I did double-checks on those and mismatched... I assume my results are always awesome) :smile:

The solo is checked out to an anonymous user, of course, so who knows if we'll get an answer to that anytime soon: [URL="www.mersenne.org/M41218607"]M41218607[/URL]

The other two that have been double-checked and await a triple-check (but I couldn't make a good guess) are: M39787061 and M46849639, which I think are both available.

Anyway, that's the kind of fun and in-depth analysis we can really dig into, if we have enough data to get going.

Requesting DC on
[code]
DoubleCheck=40935859,74,1
[/code]

I have suspicions that I have a machine going bad.

[QUOTE=UBR47K;432311]Requesting DC on
[code]
DoubleCheck=40935859,74,1
[/code]

I have suspicions that I have a machine going bad.[/QUOTE]

Will do. I should have it done in a few days.

[QUOTE=UBR47K;432311]Requesting DC on
[code]
DoubleCheck=40935859,74,1
[/code]

I have suspicions that I have a machine going bad.[/QUOTE]

ruh roh... like this one?
[URL="http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=37767259&full=1"]M37767259[/URL]

I just turned in my result for that (I'm working on triple-checking stuff and just happened to have that one already queued up, just turned in a minute ago).

[QUOTE=Madpoo;432369]ruh roh... like this one?
[URL="http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=37767259&full=1"]M37767259[/URL]

I just turned in my result for that (I'm working on triple-checking stuff and just happened to have that one already queued up, just turned in a minute ago).[/QUOTE]

Or [url=http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=38987401&full=1]M38987401[/url], from September.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;432373]Or [url=http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=38987401&full=1]M38987401[/url], from September.[/QUOTE]

I also predict this one will end up bad news for Bruno.
[URL="http://www.mersenne.org/M37713733"]M37713733[/URL]

The other CPU has a better track record of 24 good, zero bad (lifetime stats)... compared to 79 good, 15 bad for Bruno's. Bummer.

That was my only automated prediction... [URL="http://www.mersenne.org/M40935859"]M40935859[/URL] isn't predictable... the other CPU in that one has 3 good, 1 bad. Who knows... maybe both are wrong. :smile:

[QUOTE=Madpoo;432369]ruh roh... like this one?
[URL="http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=37767259&full=1"]M37767259[/URL]

I just turned in my result for that (I'm working on triple-checking stuff and just happened to have that one already queued up, just turned in a minute ago).[/QUOTE]

*sigh* Time to put that machine down.
A few notes on it might be of interest:
i7-4790K with 2x8GB Corsair Dominator 2400MHz RAM on an Asrock Z97 Fatality Professional Motherboard.
First few results from the machine are always correct (around 3 to 4).
Then DCs turn into mismatches which get confirmed to bad results.
Running memtest shows that the RAM is bad.
Sent RAM for replacement, first results are correct and then it starts to mismatch.

The RAM I replaced I did run initial memtests and it showed no errors. Now it's bad again.
Which makes me think it has to do with the motherboard or the particular CPU.

It's possible it's still the RAM.

Here's a batch of strategic double-checks... these are generated by looking at the lifetime stats of each CPU, and it includes any system with at least 1 bad, zero good, and only one solo-checked exponent left.

I figured we'll never get any better data on whether this machine is trending good or bad, so we might as well check that last solo exponent.

Plus, looking at the lifetime stats for a CPU still gives slightly different data than looking at just one year (or one month) at a time, especially for slow systems that don't turn in that many results.

Enjoy!
[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
37480321 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=37480321,71,1
38065351 2 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38065351,71,1
38081011 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38081011,71,1
38463349 2 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38463349,71,1
38578373 2 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38578373,71,1
38678971 1 0 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=38678971,71,1
38756213 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38756213,71,1
38884147 2 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38884147,71,1
38932937 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38932937,71,1
39270377 2 0 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=39270377,71,1
39326041 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39326041,71,1
39552749 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39552749,71,1
39579289 2 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39579289,71,1
39613789 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39613789,71,1
39665389 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39665389,71,1
39743489 1 0 1 2 1 2 DoubleCheck=39743489,71,1
39933233 3 0 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=39933233,71,1
40036873 7 0 1 3 1 3 DoubleCheck=40036873,72,1
44452831 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=44452831,72,1
45328757 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=45328757,72,1
46417333 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=46417333,72,1
46629571 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=46629571,72,1
46721537 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=46721537,72,1
46731149 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=46731149,72,1
47061691 1 0 2 0 1 1 DoubleCheck=47061691,72,1
47294309 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=47294309,72,1
47366989 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=47366989,72,1
47579551 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=47579551,72,1
48075317 1 0 2 0 1 1 DoubleCheck=48075317,72,1
49157749 2 0 2 0 1 1 DoubleCheck=49157749,72,1
52796251 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=52796251,73,1
53966719 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=53966719,73,1
53980183 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=53980183,73,1
54525719 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=54525719,73,1
54925301 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=54925301,73,1
67295311 1 0 1 2 1 2 DoubleCheck=67295311,75,1
69564647 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=69564647,75,1
70481273 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=70481273,74,1
72285691 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=72285691,75,1
79272667 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=79272667,75,1[/CODE]

[QUOTE=Madpoo;432392]Enjoy!
[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
37480321 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=37480321,71,1
38065351 2 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38065351,71,1
38081011 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38081011,71,1
38463349 2 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38463349,71,1
38578373 2 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38578373,71,1
38678971 1 0 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=38678971,71,1
38756213 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38756213,71,1
38884147 2 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38884147,71,1
38932937 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38932937,71,1
[/CODE][/QUOTE]

mine

Taking these 17

[QUOTE=Madpoo;432392]

Enjoy!
[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
39270377 2 0 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=39270377,71,1
39326041 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39326041,71,1
39552749 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39552749,71,1
39579289 2 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39579289,71,1
39613789 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39613789,71,1
39665389 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39665389,71,1
39743489 1 0 1 2 1 2 DoubleCheck=39743489,71,1
39933233 3 0 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=39933233,71,1
40036873 7 0 1 3 1 3 DoubleCheck=40036873,72,1
44452831 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=44452831,72,1
45328757 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=45328757,72,1
46417333 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=46417333,72,1
46629571 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=46629571,72,1
46721537 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=46721537,72,1
46731149 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=46731149,72,1
47061691 1 0 2 0 1 1 DoubleCheck=47061691,72,1
47294309 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=47294309,72,1[/CODE][/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=UBR47K;432311]Requesting DC on
[code]
DoubleCheck=40935859,74,1
[/code]

I have suspicions that I have a machine going bad.[/QUOTE]

It was bad.

Requesting a TC on a Cudalucas result:
[code]
DoubleCheck=N/A,36833107,75,1[/code]

[QUOTE=UBR47K;432905]Requesting a TC on a Cudalucas result:
[code]
DoubleCheck=N/A,36833107,75,1[/code][/QUOTE]

I should have a result for you in a couple of days.

[QUOTE=UBR47K;432905]Requesting a TC on a Cudalucas result:
[code]
DoubleCheck=N/A,36833107,75,1[/code][/QUOTE]

Yours was bad.

I have an updated strategic DC list here... I think all of the triple-checking that Airsquirrels and I are going through is knocking a few more systems into the "bad" category, so that's fun.

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
36376999 9 2 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=36376999,71,1
36413137 3 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=36413137,71,1
39169657 3 1 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=39169657,71,1
39331979 9 2 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=39331979,71,1
39637811 4 0 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=39637811,71,1
39691349 6 2 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=39691349,71,1
39746587 4 1 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=39746587,71,1
39775243 5 0 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=39775243,71,1
39844261 3 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39844261,71,1
39972563 3 0 2 0 1 1 DoubleCheck=39972563,71,1
39973889 9 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39973889,71,1
40129171 3 0 2 3 2 3 DoubleCheck=40129171,72,1
40494269 6 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40494269,72,1
40503527 10 3 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40503527,72,1
40515823 7 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40515823,72,1
40670449 3 1 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=40670449,72,1
40922939 7 2 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40922939,72,1
40935749 4 0 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=40935749,72,1
46659887 3 1 7 0 7 0 DoubleCheck=46659887,72,1
47741513 3 1 7 0 7 0 DoubleCheck=47741513,72,1
47786227 3 1 7 0 7 0 DoubleCheck=47786227,72,1
48953297 3 1 7 0 7 0 DoubleCheck=48953297,72,1
49584901 3 1 7 0 7 0 DoubleCheck=49584901,72,1
49882321 3 1 7 0 7 0 DoubleCheck=49882321,72,1
50542883 3 1 7 0 7 0 DoubleCheck=50542883,73,1
51136223 3 1 5 2 4 3 DoubleCheck=51136223,73,1
54177881 3 1 5 2 4 3 DoubleCheck=54177881,73,1
54236099 3 1 5 2 4 3 DoubleCheck=54236099,73,1[/CODE]

i took these:

[CODE]36376999 9 2 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=36376999,71,1
36413137 3 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=36413137,71,1
39169657 3 1 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=39169657,71,1
39331979 9 2 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=39331979,71,1
39637811 4 0 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=39637811,71,1
39691349 6 2 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=39691349,71,1
39746587 4 1 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=39746587,71,1
39775243 5 0 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=39775243,71,1
[/CODE]

[QUOTE=Madpoo;433121]I have an updated strategic DC list here...

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
39844261 3 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39844261,71,1
39972563 3 0 2 0 1 1 DoubleCheck=39972563,71,1
39973889 9 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39973889,71,1
40129171 3 0 2 3 2 3 DoubleCheck=40129171,72,1
40494269 6 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40494269,72,1
40503527 10 3 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40503527,72,1
40515823 7 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40515823,72,1
40670449 3 1 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=40670449,72,1
40922939 7 2 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40922939,72,1
40935749 4 0 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=40935749,72,1
[/CODE][/QUOTE]

just reserved these.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;433121]I have an updated strategic DC list here... I think all of the triple-checking that Airsquirrels and I are going through is knocking a few more systems into the "bad" category, so that's fun.

[[/QUOTE]

I ass-um-e the answer is:"You personally take the leftovers."

The question: Regularly you post new list of DC's needed.
This is followed by a few "I'll take this subset...".
But I rarely see all of them spoken for.
What happens to them?

If I do not have the correct answer above then is there a list of all the leftovers; or alternatively do you occasionally re-scan for any and all DC's required?

Thx

[QUOTE=petrw1;433144]I ass-um-e the answer is:"You personally take the leftovers."

The question: Regularly you post new list of DC's needed.
This is followed by a few "I'll take this subset...".
But I rarely see all of them spoken for.
What happens to them?

If I do not have the correct answer above then is there a list of all the leftovers; or alternatively do you occasionally re-scan for any and all DC's required?
[/QUOTE]

The unclaimed ones are either naturally assigned to other folks, or they show up again the next time I generate a list.

I do occasionally take a few of these myself but right now I've been primarily working on the exponents needing triple-checks.

I've already got enough work at the moment, but I tend to not take the high ones because I don't want to wait years for a triple check, if necessary.

Are you working all every triple check needed, starting from the bottom?

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;433149]I've already got enough work at the moment, but I tend to not take the high ones because I don't want to wait years for a triple check, if necessary.

Are you working all every triple check needed, starting from the bottom?[/QUOTE]

We have worked through almost all of the triple checks below the DC churners line (40M or so). The total number of triples checks currently needed is small enough that my goal is to work all the way through them with Madpoo and then keep them caught up while tackling new problems.

Recently we did some strategic double checks and some checks on machines with no good or bad record. We definitely have one user with some very bad machines turning in a significant number of results. I wonder if we shouldn't attempt to reach out to that user?

[QUOTE=airsquirrels;433180]We have worked through almost all of the triple checks below the DC churners line (40M or so). The total number of triples checks currently needed is small enough that my goal is to work all the way through them with Madpoo and then keep them caught up while tackling new problems.[/QUOTE]

In fact, I've been snagging everything below 44M. But then again that 40M-44M range is in the middle of the cat4 stuff and the exponents needing triple-checks are usually already assigned or they get picked up pretty quick.

[QUOTE]Recently we did some strategic double checks and some checks on machines with no good or bad record. We definitely have one user with some very bad machines turning in a significant number of results. I wonder if we shouldn't attempt to reach out to that user?[/QUOTE]

I kind of wondered about that with some of these... in many cases, the *really* bad computers haven't checked anything in for a long time, but in this case, he's still submitting stuff even this month, but at least its recent track record is doing better than it was even just a year ago.

Still, when you have a box that does 30+ LL tests a month and in any given month a VERY high percentage is coming up bad... do we alert them, or is it up to them to keep on top of things?

Primenet does have an option you can check to be alerted when any of your results turned out to be bad, although it's per CPU, not per account. Hmm... or maybe it's only if it returns a "suspicious" result, like it says? Anyway, I'm afraid that option is so obscure it's not much use...it'd be better as an account-wide option that sends an email when any past result of yours turns out bad, even if it's still an opt-in thing.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;433121]I have an updated strategic DC list here... I think all of the triple-checking that Airsquirrels and I are going through is knocking a few more systems into the "bad" category, so that's fun.

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
46659887 3 1 7 0 7 0 DoubleCheck=46659887,72,1
47741513 3 1 7 0 7 0 DoubleCheck=47741513,72,1
47786227 3 1 7 0 7 0 DoubleCheck=47786227,72,1
48953297 3 1 7 0 7 0 DoubleCheck=48953297,72,1
49584901 3 1 7 0 7 0 DoubleCheck=49584901,72,1
49882321 3 1 7 0 7 0 DoubleCheck=49882321,72,1
50542883 3 1 7 0 7 0 DoubleCheck=50542883,73,1
51136223 3 1 5 2 4 3 DoubleCheck=51136223,73,1
54177881 3 1 5 2 4 3 DoubleCheck=54177881,73,1
54236099 3 1 5 2 4 3 DoubleCheck=54236099,73,1[/CODE][/QUOTE]

I took these, what was left of the list.

Here are a few more... looking at the CPU's lifetime history and picked any that had more than zero bad, zero good, and only one or two non-doublechecked results. Could be interesting...

For example, there are systems that have only ever checked in two results and one of them was bad... I have to think there are good odds their other one is bad as well.

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
39837151 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=39837151,71,1
39931043 1 0 1 2 1 2 DoubleCheck=39931043,71,1
40013153 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40013153,72,1
40196521 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40196521,72,1
40502323 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40502323,72,1
40502723 4 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40502723,72,1
40542419 4 0 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=40542419,72,1
40575707 3 0 2 1 1 2 DoubleCheck=40575707,72,1
46350407 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=46350407,72,1
46548809 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=46548809,72,1
46585949 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=46585949,72,1
58412941 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=58412941,73,1
59690401 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=59690401,73,1
60351829 1 0 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=60351829,74,1
60475663 1 0 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=60475663,74,1
67295311 1 0 1 2 1 2 DoubleCheck=67295311,75,1
67876027 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=67876027,75,1
68844197 1 0 0 8 1 7 DoubleCheck=68844197,75,1
69564647 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=69564647,75,1
70481273 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=70481273,74,1
72285691 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=72285691,75,1
77778251 1 0 3 0 2 1 DoubleCheck=77778251,75,1
79272667 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=79272667,75,1[/CODE]

[QUOTE=Madpoo;433934]Here are a few more... looking at the CPU's lifetime history and picked any that had more than zero bad, zero good, and only one or two non-doublechecked results. Could be interesting...

For example, there are systems that have only ever checked in two results and one of them was bad... I have to think there are good odds their other one is bad as well.
[/QUOTE]

I queued them all. Should keep me busy for a month. I have some CPU power now, since SoB is down.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;433944]I queued them all. Should keep me busy for a month. I have some CPU power now, since SoB is down.[/QUOTE]

A pity what happened there. I hope PrimeNet is careful about backups.

More strategic double-check stuff.

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
38305409 5 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38305409,71,1
38941213 6 2 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38941213,71,1
39081709 3 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=39081709,71,1
40083389 4 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40083389,72,1
40183463 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40183463,72,1
40324943 3 0 3 0 2 1 DoubleCheck=40324943,72,1
40424129 3 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40424129,72,1
40463261 6 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40463261,72,1
40707103 5 1 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40707103,72,1
40733453 4 0 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=40733453,72,1
40758463 4 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40758463,72,1
41080399 5 0 3 0 2 1 DoubleCheck=41080399,72,1
41109259 15 5 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41109259,72,1
41178523 4 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41178523,72,1
41218607 3 1 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=41218607,72,1
41250659 4 1 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=41250659,72,1
45968987 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=45968987,72,1
47151683 3 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=47151683,72,1
47231027 9 3 6 2 4 4 DoubleCheck=47231027,72,1
47363587 3 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=47363587,72,1
47368703 3 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=47368703,72,1
47374993 3 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=47374993,72,1
48782423 9 3 6 2 4 4 DoubleCheck=48782423,72,1
49554821 9 3 6 2 4 4 DoubleCheck=49554821,72,1
49602347 3 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=49602347,72,1
50158111 9 3 6 2 4 4 DoubleCheck=50158111,73,1
73511609 5 1 11 0 11 0 DoubleCheck=73511609,75,1
73602083 5 1 11 0 11 0 DoubleCheck=73602083,75,1
73605017 9 0 16 0 16 0 DoubleCheck=73605017,75,1
73611509 5 1 11 0 11 0 DoubleCheck=73611509,75,1
73648909 19 3 9 0 8 1 DoubleCheck=73648909,75,1
73681061 9 0 16 0 16 0 DoubleCheck=73681061,75,1
73682051 17 2 20 0 20 0 DoubleCheck=73682051,75,1
73809503 17 2 20 0 20 0 DoubleCheck=73809503,75,1
78037517 3 0 3 6 4 5 DoubleCheck=78037517,75,1
78042049 3 0 3 6 4 5 DoubleCheck=78042049,75,1
78042199 3 0 3 6 4 5 DoubleCheck=78042199,75,1
78042233 3 0 3 6 4 5 DoubleCheck=78042233,75,1
[/CODE]

[QUOTE=petrw1;431837][CODE]78409057 6 1 24 0 24 0 DoubleCheck=78409057,75,1
78409061 6 1 24 0 24 0 DoubleCheck=78409061,75,1
78409361 6 1 24 0 24 0 DoubleCheck=78409361,75,1
78483023 6 1 27 0 27 0 DoubleCheck=78483023,75,1[/CODE][/QUOTE]

78409057 - Mismatch
78409361 - Mismatch

The other 2 will be done by the end of the month.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;434523]More strategic double-check stuff.[/QUOTE]

I took these:

[CODE]38305409 5 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38305409,71,1
38941213 6 2 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=38941213,71,1
39081709 3 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=39081709,71,1
40083389 4 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40083389,72,1
40183463 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40183463,72,1
40324943 3 0 3 0 2 1 DoubleCheck=40324943,72,1
[/CODE]

Mine...
 

[CODE]40424129 3 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40424129,72,1
40463261 6 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40463261,72,1
40707103 5 1 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40707103,72,1
40733453 4 0 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=40733453,72,1
40758463 4 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40758463,72,1
41080399 5 0 3 0 2 1 DoubleCheck=41080399,72,1
41109259 15 5 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41109259,72,1
41178523 4 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41178523,72,1
41218607 3 1 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=41218607,72,1
41250659 4 1 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=41250659,72[/CODE]

[QUOTE=petrw1;434567]78409057 - Mismatch
78409361 - Mismatch

The other 2 will be done by the end of the month.[/QUOTE]

And these 2 match....

78409061 C - Verified
78483023 C - Verified

Here's a new list of strategic double checks.

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
39243439 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39243439,71,1
40147433 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40147433,72,1
40190221 2 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40190221,72,1
40335709 2 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40335709,72,1
40608851 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40608851,72,1
40609993 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40609993,72,1
40633921 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40633921,72,1
40635191 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40635191,72,1
40683901 6 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40683901,72,1
40755161 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40755161,72,1
40842203 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40842203,72,1
40874411 3 1 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=40874411,72,1
41065957 4 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41065957,72,1
41097391 6 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=41097391,72,1
41142403 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41142403,72,1
41241313 6 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=41241313,72,1
41255129 6 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41255129,73,1
45627863 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=45627863,72,1
45968987 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=45968987,74,1
47231027 9 3 6 2 4 4 DoubleCheck=47231027,74,1
47368703 3 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=47368703,74,1
47374993 3 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=47374993,74,1
47884789 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=47884789,72,1
48782423 9 3 6 2 4 4 DoubleCheck=48782423,74,1
49554821 9 3 6 2 4 4 DoubleCheck=49554821,74,1
49602347 3 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=49602347,74,1
50158111 9 3 6 2 4 4 DoubleCheck=50158111,75,1
70623359 3 1 0 3 3 0 DoubleCheck=70623359,75,1
73484093 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73484093,75,1
73511609 5 1 11 0 11 0 DoubleCheck=73511609,75,1
73566083 5 1 11 0 11 0 DoubleCheck=73566083,75,1
73602083 5 1 11 0 11 0 DoubleCheck=73602083,75,1
73605017 9 0 16 0 16 0 DoubleCheck=73605017,75,1
73611509 5 1 11 0 11 0 DoubleCheck=73611509,75,1
73648909 19 4 8 0 6 2 DoubleCheck=73648909,75,1
73681061 9 0 16 0 16 0 DoubleCheck=73681061,75,1
73682051 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73682051,75,1
73809503 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73809503,75,1
73915319 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73915319,75,1
73915801 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73915801,75,1
73916057 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73916057,75,1
73919411 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73919411,75,1
73919803 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73919803,75,1
78037517 3 0 3 6 4 5 DoubleCheck=78037517,75,1
78042049 3 0 3 6 4 5 DoubleCheck=78042049,75,1
78042199 3 0 3 6 4 5 DoubleCheck=78042199,75,1
78042233 3 0 3 6 4 5 DoubleCheck=78042233,75,1
[/CODE]

[QUOTE=Madpoo;435093]Here's a new list of strategic double checks.

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
39243439 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39243439,71,1
40147433 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40147433,72,1
40190221 2 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40190221,72,1
40335709 2 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40335709,72,1
[/CODE][/QUOTE]

I queued these.

[QUOTE=Prime95;411520]Nevermind the questions. You have found a real bug!!

If the final shift count is more than (exponent - 64), then the top (64 - (exponent - shiftcount)) bits are zeroed. I'll code up a fix.

The chance this is affecting existing LL tests is small. For exponents around 64M, 1 in 1,000,000 LL tests will be affected. I'll query the database to get us a list affected LL tests.[/QUOTE]

Since I recently ran a bunch of additional (and unneeded) checks, I forgot about this bug, or maybe I was thinking 28.7 had the fix (it doesn't).

Thanks to GP2 for noticing I now had 2 more bad results in my stats due to the "shift count+64 < exponent" bug. Whoops.

Just to know, does version 28.9 have that fix?

[QUOTE=Madpoo;435411]
Just to know, does version 28.9 have that fix?[/QUOTE]

yes

[QUOTE=Madpoo;435411]Thanks to GP2 for noticing I now had 2 more bad results in my stats due to the "shift count+64 < exponent" bug. Whoops.[/QUOTE]

I think shift_count > (exponent − 64) becomes increasingly unlikely the higher the exponent gets. So it's mostly only an issue if redoing a large batch of small exponents.

In the current set of unverified LL residues there are only ten results with as many as four leading zeroes and none with more than that.

[CODE]exponent residue
-------- -------
42540697 00001913CA986A__
46348957 00007E82ADF8CC__
48587443 0000774BAE66CD__
51265471 000070C8B21AAA__
56958731 000014EC228B1F__
59386493 000021A9AFD6CD__
61709519 00004D157AC8A5__
67765171 0000396D20B910__
69927623 000039A4D46421__
77594761 0000457BCA1899__[/CODE]

These are very likely correct residues coincidentally starting with leading zeros, and in any case not a priority to double-check since by its very nature this rare bug in v28.7 and earlier cannot cause a Mersenne prime to be missed.

[QUOTE=GP2;435450]These are very likely correct residues coincidentally starting with leading zeros, and in any case not a priority to double-check since by its very nature this rare bug in v28.7 and earlier cannot cause a Mersenne prime to be missed.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, those are probably fine. I just looked and the last actual result (besides me) to get hit by this was the bad result here:
[URL="www.mersenne.org/M37830997"]M37830997[/URL]

There appear to only be a total of 9 results that were hit by this and I'm just lucky (or crazy) enough to have 5 of those.

Besides my 5 and the other one I mentioned, here are the other 3:
163367
274147
435763

Now I do feel kind of bad for those other 4 (besides me) that got marked bad by this...

George: Do you think we should retroactively and manually mark them as good (or "factored" in some cases) instead of bad? Kind of like the manual overrides for those funky residues on the smaller exponents?

I don't know what the range is for shift counts, but given the super low occurrence of this, I suppose we can just eyeball it from time to time and make sure no new cases show up. Nothing new (besides me) since George found it.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;435459]
Now I do feel kind of bad for those other 4 (besides me) that got marked bad by this...

George: Do you think we should retroactively and manually mark them as good (or "factored" in some cases) instead of bad? Kind of like the manual overrides for those funky residues on the smaller exponents?[/QUOTE]

If you would like to manually change these 9, I'm OK with that.

[QUOTE=Prime95;435474]If you would like to manually change these 9, I'm OK with that.[/QUOTE]

Alrighty, those 9 results have been modified to reflect the appropriate "good" or "factored" status as the case may be, not "bad". In each one, the first part of the residue had the zeros, but the last part of the residue matched, indicating it was a result of the bug and not a bad run.

I'll take this one:
[code]40608851 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40608851,72,1[/code]

[QUOTE=Madpoo;435093]Here's a new list of strategic double checks.

[CODE]
40609993 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40609993,72,1
40633921 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40633921,72,1
40635191 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40635191,72,1
40683901 6 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40683901,72,1
40755161 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40755161,72,1
40842203 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40842203,72,1
40874411 3 1 1 1 1 1 DoubleCheck=40874411,72,1
41065957 4 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41065957,72,1
[/CODE][/QUOTE]

I took these, too.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;435093]Here's a new list of strategic double checks.

[CODE]70623359 3 1 0 3 3 0 DoubleCheck=70623359,75,1

73915319 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73915319,75,1
73915801 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73915801,75,1
73916057 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73916057,75,1
73919411 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73919411,75,1
73919803 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73919803,75,1
78037517 3 0 3 6 4 5 DoubleCheck=78037517,75,1
78042049 3 0 3 6 4 5 DoubleCheck=78042049,75,1
78042199 3 0 3 6 4 5 DoubleCheck=78042199,75,1
78042233 3 0 3 6 4 5 DoubleCheck=78042233,75,1
[/CODE][/QUOTE]

And these. Those last ones are going to be a while.

My DC of 37093247 didn't match. Anyone like to TC it?

[QUOTE=richs;435779]My DC of 37093247 didn't match. Anyone like to TC it?[/QUOTE]

Queued. I'll have it done in a couple days.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;435773]And these. Those last ones are going to be a while.[/QUOTE]

Those 70M should get you some nice mismatches (and I think we can be sure yours will be the correct ones). Those came from that system that had some pretty nasty runs of bad residues here and there over the past several years, usually lasting a few months at a time, then getting better, then pooping out again, etc. They come from GPUs, which reminds me I was going to look at the rate of bad results for different kinds of CPUs/GPUs...

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;435783]Queued. I'll have it done in a couple days.[/QUOTE]

Thanks, Mark, for the verification.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;435093]Here's a new list of strategic double checks.

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
41097391 6 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=41097391,72,1
41142403 1 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41142403,72,1
41241313 6 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=41241313,72,1
41255129 6 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41255129,73,1
45627863 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=45627863,72,1
45968987 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=45968987,74,1
[/CODE][/QUOTE]

I took these as well.

Been a little while since putting up a list of strategic double checks...

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
39839603 5 1 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=39839603,71,1
39992243 19 2 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39992243,71,1
40123351 10 3 4 0 2 2 DoubleCheck=40123351,72,1
40404289 8 2 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40404289,72,1
40413371 38 5 2 0 1 1 DoubleCheck=40413371,72,1
40417361 8 2 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40417361,72,1
40473841 5 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40473841,72,1
40501819 5 1 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40501819,72,1
40641659 5 1 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=40641659,72,1
40641803 4 1 2 0 1 1 DoubleCheck=40641803,72,1
40907387 3 1 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40907387,72,1
41073203 13 3 3 0 2 1 DoubleCheck=41073203,72,1
41147833 13 3 3 0 2 1 DoubleCheck=41147833,72,1
41162717 4 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41162717,72,1
41183999 3 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41183999,72,1
41216213 6 2 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41216213,72,1
41590819 5 1 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=41590819,72,1
41407819 3 1 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=41407819,72,1
41566073 3 1 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=41566073,72,1
46520153 3 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=46520153,72,1
67209017 3 0 3 1 3 1 DoubleCheck=67209017,74,1
69432359 3 0 3 1 3 1 DoubleCheck=69432359,75,1
69676049 22 5 8 0 2 6 DoubleCheck=69676049,74,1
69676169 22 5 8 0 2 6 DoubleCheck=69676169,74,1
70448837 3 1 0 3 3 0 DoubleCheck=70448837,75,1
70503361 3 1 0 3 3 0 DoubleCheck=70503361,75,1
70506521 3 0 0 3 3 0 DoubleCheck=70506521,75,1
71444189 11 3 1 5 1 5 DoubleCheck=71444189,75,1
73484093 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73484093,75,1
73511609 5 1 11 0 11 0 DoubleCheck=73511609,75,1
73512001 5 1 11 0 11 0 DoubleCheck=73512001,75,1
73512041 5 1 11 0 11 0 DoubleCheck=73512041,75,1
73546003 5 1 11 0 11 0 DoubleCheck=73546003,75,1
73566083 5 1 11 0 11 0 DoubleCheck=73566083,75,1
73602083 5 1 11 0 11 0 DoubleCheck=73602083,75,1
73605017 11 0 13 0 13 0 DoubleCheck=73605017,75,1
73611509 5 1 11 0 11 0 DoubleCheck=73611509,75,1
73612051 5 1 11 0 11 0 DoubleCheck=73612051,75,1
73612141 5 1 11 0 11 0 DoubleCheck=73612141,75,1
73613957 11 0 13 0 13 0 DoubleCheck=73613957,75,1
73642903 19 4 8 0 6 2 DoubleCheck=73642903,75,1
73645043 19 4 8 0 6 2 DoubleCheck=73645043,75,1
73645807 19 4 8 0 6 2 DoubleCheck=73645807,75,1
73646803 19 4 8 0 6 2 DoubleCheck=73646803,75,1
73648129 19 4 8 0 6 2 DoubleCheck=73648129,75,1
73648909 19 4 8 0 6 2 DoubleCheck=73648909,75,1
73681061 11 0 13 0 13 0 DoubleCheck=73681061,75,1
73682051 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73682051,75,1
73809503 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73809503,75,1
73809601 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73809601,75,1
73812031 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73812031,75,1
73812899 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73812899,75,1
73914811 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73914811,75,1
73915063 19 2 18 0 18 0 DoubleCheck=73915063,75,1
74132521 3 0 0 3 3 0 DoubleCheck=74132521,75,1
76217353 3 0 3 1 2 2 DoubleCheck=76217353,75,1
76339363 3 0 3 1 2 2 DoubleCheck=76339363,75,1
78131047 24 5 5 0 5 0 DoubleCheck=78131047,75,1
78171409 24 5 5 0 5 0 DoubleCheck=78171409,75,1
78401023 24 5 5 0 5 0 DoubleCheck=78401023,75,1[/CODE]

Took these

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
39839603 5 1 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=39839603,71,1
39992243 19 2 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=39992243,71,1
40123351 10 3 4 0 2 2 DoubleCheck=40123351,72,1
40404289 8 2 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40404289,72,1
40413371 38 5 2 0 1 1 DoubleCheck=40413371,72,1
40417361 8 2 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40417361,72,1
40473841 5 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40473841,72,1
40501819 5 1 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40501819,72,1
40641659 5 1 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=40641659,72,1
40641803 4 1 2 0 1 1 DoubleCheck=40641803,72,1
[/CODE]

and I took these:

[CODE]
40907387 3 1 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40907387,72,1
41073203 13 3 3 0 2 1 DoubleCheck=41073203,72,1
41147833 13 3 3 0 2 1 DoubleCheck=41147833,72,1
41162717 4 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41162717,72,1
41183999 3 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41183999,72,1
41216213 6 2 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41216213,72,1
[/code]

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
41590819 5 1 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=41590819,72,1
41407819 3 1 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=41407819,72,1
41566073 3 1 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=41566073,72,1
46520153 3 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=46520153,72,1
[/CODE]

I took these.

From the previous list, I took:

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
41241313 6 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=41241313,72,1
41255129 6 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41255129,73,1
45627863 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=45627863,72,1
45968987 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=45968987,74,1
47231027 9 3 6 2 4 4 DoubleCheck=47231027,74,1
47368703 3 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=47368703,74,1
47374993 3 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=47374993,74,1
47884789 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=47884789,72,1
48782423 9 3 6 2 4 4 DoubleCheck=48782423,74,1
49554821 9 3 6 2 4 4 DoubleCheck=49554821,74,1
49602347 3 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=49602347,74,1
50158111 9 3 6 2 4 4 DoubleCheck=50158111,75,1
[/CODE]

As I went picking through the bones of previous lists, I do have one thought: the results marked as "suspect" in the CAT 0 or above should be eliminated. It seems PrimeNet considers them as first-time LL when the exponents are registered.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;436995]As I went picking through the bones of previous lists, I do have one thought: the results marked as "suspect" in the CAT 0 or above should be eliminated. It seems PrimeNet considers them as first-time LL when the exponents are registered.[/QUOTE]

Hmm... I wasn't quite sure what you were asking...

A few "fun facts" about suspect results. As mentioned, so far about half of suspect results turn out to be bad. That ratio may in fact go up as we clear out the backlog of mismatches from double-checked work.

Some stats:
4663 - the # of exponents that have been checked twice (or more) and still no match
1719 - the # of those where neither result was marked suspect
2944 - the # where one of the mismatches is suspect

Let's call that 37% of mismatches were from two "clean" results, and 63% are because the first run was suspect (it's almost always the first run that was suspect, very rarely is the 2nd one suspect, but it does happen from time to time).

Essentially, it would be a VERY safe guess that of the 2944 mismatches where one is suspect, it's the suspect result that's bad. And of course, maybe one time out of 100, both are bad (in my personal experience).

Anyway, the rate of suspect results being bad could actually be higher than half, we just didn't have enough of the unknown stuff sorted out yet. :smile:

[QUOTE=Madpoo;437108]Hmm... I wasn't quite sure what you were asking...
[/QUOTE]

I mean exponents like [url=http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=78037517&full=1]M78037517[/url]. When I got the assignment it came in as LL not DC.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;437113]I mean exponents like [url=http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=78037517&full=1]M78037517[/url]. When I got the assignment it came in as LL not DC.[/QUOTE]

Oh... I see.

Yeah, I guess that's true. Generally speaking, suspect results are usually handed back out again as a first time check pretty quick because they tend to be in ranges where a lot of work is going on. That one, and a few others (242 of them) are suspect, available for assignment still, and only tested that one time so far.

I guess with that said, if we're looking at strategic double-checking, the solo tested suspect results should probably be considered.

There are 63 of them in the LL category 1 section (below 70.6M), and given that a suspect result is traditionally about 50/50 good/bad that may fall into the "let's get 'em done now" category.

In total, 240 of the 242 are all below 80M. The exceptions are M123456811 and M595999993.

[QUOTE=kladner;435514]I'll take this one:
[code]40608851 1 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=40608851,72,1[/code][/QUOTE]

This finished with a mismatch.

I took these ones:

DoubleCheck=67209017,74,1
DoubleCheck=69432359,75,1
DoubleCheck=69676049,74,1
DoubleCheck=69676169,74,1
DoubleCheck=70448837,75,1
DoubleCheck=70503361,75,1
DoubleCheck=70506521,75,1
DoubleCheck=71444189,75,1

Here's a new list:
[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
39069229 9 3 1 2 1 2 DoubleCheck=39069229,71,1
40588481 3 1 10 0 8 2 DoubleCheck=40588481,72,1
40588697 3 1 10 0 8 2 DoubleCheck=40588697,72,1
41453761 3 1 10 0 8 2 DoubleCheck=41453761,72,1
45740099 15 5 7 1 7 1 DoubleCheck=45740099,72,1
45740119 15 5 7 1 7 1 DoubleCheck=45740119,72,1
45740129 15 5 7 1 7 1 DoubleCheck=45740129,72,1
45740147 15 5 7 1 7 1 DoubleCheck=45740147,72,1
46367743 3 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=46367743,72,1
46400623 4 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=46400623,72,1
46696829 6 2 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=46696829,72,1
46847797 3 1 13 0 11 2 DoubleCheck=46847797,72,1
46888451 3 1 13 0 11 2 DoubleCheck=46888451,72,1
47164739 3 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=47164739,72,1
47174123 3 1 13 0 11 2 DoubleCheck=47174123,72,1
47210731 6 2 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=47210731,72,1
47303819 3 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=47303819,72,1
48062897 3 1 13 0 11 2 DoubleCheck=48062897,72,1
49212803 4 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=49212803,72,1
49676401 6 2 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=49676401,72,1
49750709 3 1 13 0 11 2 DoubleCheck=49750709,72,1
50588729 3 1 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=50588729,73,1
50628659 3 1 13 0 11 2 DoubleCheck=50628659,73,1
50725481 6 2 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=50725481,73,1
50835227 4 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=50835227,73,1
51096671 3 1 13 0 11 2 DoubleCheck=51096671,73,1
51592631 12 4 6 1 6 1 DoubleCheck=51592631,73,1
51992483 10 1 5 0 3 2 DoubleCheck=51992483,73,1
52548817 3 1 1 3 1 3 DoubleCheck=52548817,73,1
52577947 12 4 6 1 6 1 DoubleCheck=52577947,73,1
53386631 10 1 5 0 3 2 DoubleCheck=53386631,73,1
55319633 12 4 6 1 6 1 DoubleCheck=55319633,73,1
58322179 3 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=58322179,73,1
58926823 7 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=58926823,73,1
59168777 3 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=59168777,73,1
60039523 12 4 6 1 6 1 DoubleCheck=60039523,74,1
60387667 12 4 6 1 6 1 DoubleCheck=60387667,74,1
61756243 7 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=61756243,74,1
61847957 12 4 6 1 6 1 DoubleCheck=61847957,74,1
62796527 7 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=62796527,74,1
63773497 7 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=63773497,74,1
64071221 3 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=64071221,74,1
68804809 6 2 5 0 4 1 DoubleCheck=68804809,75,1
68845211 6 2 5 0 4 1 DoubleCheck=68845211,75,1
71069681 3 0 3 1 3 1 DoubleCheck=71069681,75,1
72208141 6 2 5 0 4 1 DoubleCheck=72208141,75,1
73675429 6 2 5 0 4 1 DoubleCheck=73675429,75,1
74132521 3 0 0 3 2 1 DoubleCheck=74132521,75,1
75930223 3 1 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=75930223,75,1
76217353 3 0 3 1 2 2 DoubleCheck=76217353,75,1
76339363 3 0 3 1 2 2 DoubleCheck=76339363,75,1
77133593 3 1 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=77133593,75,1
77133689 3 1 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=77133689,75,1
77133769 3 1 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=77133769,75,1[/CODE]

Thanks. I took these:

[CODE]
39069229 9 3 1 2 1 2 DoubleCheck=39069229,71,1
40588481 3 1 10 0 8 2 DoubleCheck=40588481,72,1
40588697 3 1 10 0 8 2 DoubleCheck=40588697,72,1
41453761 3 1 10 0 8 2 DoubleCheck=41453761,72,1[/CODE]

I took 45740099 to 49750709

[QUOTE=Madpoo;437571]Here's a new list:[/quote]

I see many of these are recycled from old lists I've been working through. Anyway, I'm taking these:

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
50588729 3 1 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=50588729,73,1

51592631 12 4 6 1 6 1 DoubleCheck=51592631,73,1
51992483 10 1 5 0 3 2 DoubleCheck=51992483,73,1

52577947 12 4 6 1 6 1 DoubleCheck=52577947,73,1
53386631 10 1 5 0 3 2 DoubleCheck=53386631,73,1

55319633 12 4 6 1 6 1 DoubleCheck=55319633,73,1
58322179 3 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=58322179,73,1
58926823 7 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=58926823,73,1
59168777 3 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=59168777,73,1
60039523 12 4 6 1 6 1 DoubleCheck=60039523,74,1
60387667 12 4 6 1 6 1 DoubleCheck=60387667,74,1
[/CODE]

I didn't register these new-to-me exponents, and I'll likely come back for them soon if no one takes them:

[code]
50628659 3 1 13 0 11 2 DoubleCheck=50628659,73,1
50725481 6 2 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=50725481,73,1
50835227 4 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=50835227,73,1
51096671 3 1 13 0 11 2 DoubleCheck=51096671,73,1
52548817 3 1 1 3 1 3 DoubleCheck=52548817,73,1
[/code]

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;437946]I didn't register these new-to-me exponents, and I'll likely come back for them soon if no one takes them:

[code]
50628659 3 1 13 0 11 2 DoubleCheck=50628659,73,1
50725481 6 2 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=50725481,73,1
50835227 4 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=50835227,73,1
51096671 3 1 13 0 11 2 DoubleCheck=51096671,73,1
52548817 3 1 1 3 1 3 DoubleCheck=52548817,73,1
[/code][/QUOTE]

Okay, I've taken those now, too. So everything up to and including 60387667.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;437571]
61756243 7 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=61756243,74,1
61847957 12 4 6 1 6 1 DoubleCheck=61847957,74,1
62796527 7 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=62796527,74,1
[/quote]

Took these, too.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;438172]Took these, too.[/QUOTE]

Awesome, thanks.

Later today I'll run a new query... I checked last night briefly and there were some new exponents that would be good candidates for strategic double-checking.

I've been combining exponents from different queries to get a "best of" list, using different criteria to make sure we're getting some good stuff. So, stay tuned for some new things later. :smile:

I'm running through a few hundred small exponent triple checks on my new cluster. Then I'll have another 16 cores chewing through these strategic checks.

I have one more machine to assemble this evening, and I'll do the same with it.

So please make a big list lol

I've still got two dozen exponents culled from the posts in this thread since January.

I noticed that AirSquirrels grabbed all the high Robert_Socal exponents.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;438202]I noticed that AirSquirrels grabbed all the high Robert_Socal exponents.[/QUOTE]

There's a few more Robert_Socal stuff in this list (the larger ones with a lot of bad results).

Enjoy!
[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
39137249 3 0 3 1 3 1 DoubleCheck=39137249,71,1
39148517 3 0 3 1 3 1 DoubleCheck=39148517,71,1
40087081 11 3 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40087081,72,1
40188817 4 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40188817,72,1
40314707 9 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40314707,72,1
40404499 9 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40404499,72,1
40513007 6 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40513007,72,1
40604689 9 3 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40604689,72,1
40820839 3 0 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=40820839,72,1
41154457 4 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=41154457,72,1
41373911 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41373911,72,1
41421001 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41421001,72,1
41427973 4 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41427973,72,1
41502719 3 0 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=41502719,72,1
41675497 4 0 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=41675497,72,1
41716019 4 0 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=41716019,72,1
41842973 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41842973,72,1
42010939 3 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=42010939,72,1
42015151 3 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=42015151,72,1
42171959 4 1 9 0 7 2 DoubleCheck=42171959,72,1
46728221 3 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=46728221,72,1
50495183 3 1 3 1 3 1 DoubleCheck=50495183,73,1
50495233 3 1 3 1 3 1 DoubleCheck=50495233,73,1
53951959 3 1 3 1 3 1 DoubleCheck=53951959,73,1
61841803 4 0 6 2 6 2 DoubleCheck=61841803,74,1
61843973 4 0 6 2 6 2 DoubleCheck=61843973,74,1
61844329 4 0 6 2 6 2 DoubleCheck=61844329,74,1
61846193 4 0 6 2 6 2 DoubleCheck=61846193,74,1
61847957 12 4 6 1 6 1 DoubleCheck=61847957,74,1
61995611 4 0 6 2 6 2 DoubleCheck=61995611,74,1
62012707 4 0 6 2 6 2 DoubleCheck=62012707,74,1
63773497 7 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=63773497,74,1
64071221 3 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=64071221,74,1
68804809 6 2 5 0 4 1 DoubleCheck=68804809,75,1
68845211 6 2 5 0 4 1 DoubleCheck=68845211,75,1
71069681 3 0 3 1 1 3 DoubleCheck=71069681,75,1
72208141 6 2 5 0 4 1 DoubleCheck=72208141,75,1
73167709 3 1 2 4 5 1 DoubleCheck=73167709,75,1
73675429 6 2 5 0 4 1 DoubleCheck=73675429,75,1
74132521 3 0 0 3 2 1 DoubleCheck=74132521,75,1
74431009 20 2 17 0 17 0 DoubleCheck=74431009,75,1
74431061 20 2 17 0 17 0 DoubleCheck=74431061,75,1
75772793 4 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=75772793,75,1
75845923 3 1 2 4 5 1 DoubleCheck=75845923,75,1
75930223 3 1 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=75930223,75,1
76009559 4 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=76009559,75,1
76217353 3 0 3 1 2 2 DoubleCheck=76217353,75,1
76320947 3 1 2 4 5 1 DoubleCheck=76320947,75,1
76339363 3 0 3 1 2 2 DoubleCheck=76339363,75,1
76437577 3 1 2 4 5 1 DoubleCheck=76437577,75,1
76938397 3 0 2 1 1 2 DoubleCheck=76938397,75,1
77133593 3 1 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=77133593,75,1
77133689 3 1 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=77133689,75,1
77133769 3 1 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=77133769,75,1
78131047 24 5 5 0 5 0 DoubleCheck=78131047,75,1
78171409 24 5 5 0 5 0 DoubleCheck=78171409,75,1
78401023 24 5 5 0 5 0 DoubleCheck=78401023,75,1
[/CODE]

I took these:

[CODE]40314707 9 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40314707,72,1
40404499 9 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40404499,72,1
[/CODE]

[QUOTE=Madpoo;438223]There's a few more Robert_Socal stuff in this list (the larger ones with a lot of bad results).

Enjoy!
[/QUOTE]

Haha, I already had many of those in my short list, which I just got through queuing to be processed within the next six weeks. Anyway, I took these:

[code]
61847957 12 4 6 1 6 1 DoubleCheck=61847957,74,1
61995611 4 0 6 2 6 2 DoubleCheck=61995611,74,1
62012707 4 0 6 2 6 2 DoubleCheck=62012707,74,1
63773497 7 1 7 0 5 2 DoubleCheck=63773497,74,1
64071221 3 1 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=64071221,74,1
68804809 6 2 5 0 4 1 DoubleCheck=68804809,75,1
68845211 6 2 5 0 4 1 DoubleCheck=68845211,75,1
72208141 6 2 5 0 4 1 DoubleCheck=72208141,75,1
73675429 6 2 5 0 4 1 DoubleCheck=73675429,75,1
74132521 3 0 0 3 2 1 DoubleCheck=74132521,75,1
75930223 3 1 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=75930223,75,1
76217353 3 0 3 1 2 2 DoubleCheck=76217353,75,1
76339363 3 0 3 1 2 2 DoubleCheck=76339363,75,1
77133593 3 1 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=77133593,75,1
77133689 3 1 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=77133689,75,1
77133769 3 1 4 0 4 0 DoubleCheck=77133769,75,1
78401023 24 5 5 0 5 0 DoubleCheck=78401023,75,1
[/code]

Exponents above 71M remaining:

[code]
71069681 3 0 3 1 1 3 DoubleCheck=71069681,75,1
73167709 3 1 2 4 5 1 DoubleCheck=73167709,75,1
74431009 20 2 17 0 17 0 DoubleCheck=74431009,75,1
74431061 20 2 17 0 17 0 DoubleCheck=74431061,75,1
75772793 4 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=75772793,75,1
75845923 3 1 2 4 5 1 DoubleCheck=75845923,75,1
76009559 4 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=76009559,75,1
76320947 3 1 2 4 5 1 DoubleCheck=76320947,75,1
76437577 3 1 2 4 5 1 DoubleCheck=76437577,75,1
76938397 3 0 2 1 1 2 DoubleCheck=76938397,75,1
78131047 24 5 5 0 5 0 DoubleCheck=78131047,75,1
78171409 24 5 5 0 5 0 DoubleCheck=78171409,75,1
[/CODE]

I took nothing below 61847957.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;438228]Haha, I already had many of those in my short list, which I just got through queuing to be processed within the next six weeks. Anyway, I took these:
[/QUOTE]

Make sure to reserve them otherwise someone else could get them automatically (and I'll just keep including them in future lists) :smile:

[QUOTE=Madpoo;438231]Make sure to reserve them otherwise someone else could get them automatically (and I'll just keep including them in future lists) :smile:[/QUOTE]

I always do. I currently have 56 SDC assignments.

I have one more machine to get going tonight and I'll grab a handful three or four more.

Edit: took this one:

[code]
71069681 3 0 3 1 1 3 DoubleCheck=71069681,75,1
[/code]

[code]
78131047 24 5 5 0 5 0 DoubleCheck=78131047,75,1
78171409 24 5 5 0 5 0 DoubleCheck=78171409,75,1
[/CODE]

Took these.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;438223]
[CODE]40513007 6 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40513007,72,1
40604689 9 3 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40604689,72,1
40820839 3 0 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=40820839,72,1
[/CODE][/QUOTE]

I took two of these. The middle one is reserved by kkmrkkblmbrbk.

[code]
76009559 4 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=76009559,75,1
76320947 3 1 2 4 5 1 DoubleCheck=76320947,75,1
76437577 3 1 2 4 5 1 DoubleCheck=76437577,75,1
76938397 3 0 2 1 1 2 DoubleCheck=76938397,75,1
[/CODE]

Took these.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;438223]
[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
39137249 3 0 3 1 3 1 DoubleCheck=39137249,71,1
39148517 3 0 3 1 3 1 DoubleCheck=39148517,71,1
40087081 11 3 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40087081,72,1
40188817 4 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=40188817,72,1
[/CODE][/QUOTE]

Took the smallest four
r.

From MadPoo's latest list, I've taken everything from M61847957 and above.

My DC of 38957371 didn't match. Anyone like to TC it?

[QUOTE=richs;438597]My DC of 38957371 didn't match. Anyone like to TC it?[/QUOTE]

I queued it first position on one of my machines. Should be done by Tuesday.

I took these
[code]
61841803 4 0 6 2 6 2 DoubleCheck=61841803,74,1
61843973 4 0 6 2 6 2 DoubleCheck=61843973,74,1
61844329 4 0 6 2 6 2 DoubleCheck=61844329,74,1
61846193 4 0 6 2 6 2 DoubleCheck=61846193,74,1
[/CODE]

These are the unclaimed exponents:

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
41154457 4 0 2 0 2 0 DoubleCheck=41154457,72,1
41373911 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41373911,72,1
41421001 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41421001,72,1
41427973 4 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41427973,72,1
41502719 3 0 2 1 2 1 DoubleCheck=41502719,72,1
41675497 4 0 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=41675497,72,1
41716019 4 0 3 0 3 0 DoubleCheck=41716019,72,1
41842973 3 0 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=41842973,72,1
42010939 3 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=42010939,72,1
42015151 3 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=42015151,72,1
42171959 4 1 9 0 7 2 DoubleCheck=42171959,72,1
46728221 3 1 1 0 1 0 DoubleCheck=46728221,72,1
50495183 3 1 3 1 3 1 DoubleCheck=50495183,73,1
50495233 3 1 3 1 3 1 DoubleCheck=50495233,73,1
53951959 3 1 3 1 3 1 DoubleCheck=53951959,73,1
[/code]