[QUOTE=ewmayer;475333]Yes, I inadvertently leaked a lower bound by giving those data without mentioning how long the DC in question had been going. If you were paying close attention, you'd have noticed that a later poster inadvertently leaked an upper bound, even before the 'starts with a 7' leak. That one was more subtle, but hey, we like to keep the local Sherlock-Holmesian sleuths on their toes, it adds to the fun.[/QUOTE]

Indeed. There was an upper bounds leak of 83M on the first page of this thread. Then on page 8, there's another leak which repeats the same upper bounds.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;475333]Yes, I inadvertently leaked a lower bound by giving those data without mentioning how long the DC in question had been going. If you were paying close attention, you'd have noticed that a later poster inadvertently leaked an upper bound, even before the 'starts with a 7' leak. That one was more subtle, but hey, we like to keep the local Sherlock-Holmesian sleuths on their toes, it adds to the fun.[/QUOTE]

Oh, and it was mentioned that AirSquirrels is doing a run with gpuOwL. For the astute observer, you'll recall that it only does 2M and 4M FFT sizes. Although, we were biting our nails and wondering whether it would complete successfully with a 4M FFT size. I think it's really pushing the bleeding edge there, but then again I really don't know at what point it just starts spitting out round off errors, but it sure seems like it'd be close?

Here's another clue... in the decimal expansion, there are 1 or more instances of the sequence 3141592 :smile:

Let's see, what other odd tidbits can be gleaned from the decimal expansion that won't give it away to anyone crazy enough to do the expansion for thousands of exponents and looking in them to see if they spot the same things...

Well, here's an interesting one. There's a digit that's repeated 10 times in a row. I won't say which digit just to keep it interesting. There's also a sequence in there of 8 increasing digits in a row (could be 0-7, 1-8, or 2-9 ... I won't say). :smile: Well heck, there are just so many digits in there, you can find all kinds of funny patterns if you look.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;475340]Indeed. There was an upper bounds leak of 83M on the first page of this thread. Then on page 8, there's another leak which repeats the same upper bounds.[/QUOTE]

I mean an appreciably lower (tighter) upper bound - Aaron's post immediately above this one points the way, as well as leaking much more info (and not the decimal expansion stuff).

Decimal base is too arbitrary.
How many repeated digits can be found in Unary numeral system?
If the candidate is printed on a poster in base 1, what would be the height x width proportions?:smile:

Worth mentioning, the gpuOwl verification did complete successfully in record time! (Thanks Preda!)

Max ROE was 0.38.

[QUOTE=ewmayer;475346]I mean an appreciably lower (tighter) upper bound - Aaron's post immediately above this one points the way, as well as leaking much more info (and not the decimal expansion stuff).[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I didn't consider that aspect at first. Was kind of a "d'oh!" moment when I read it.

With that bit of information, it makes it very easy to figure out, especially if you ask the server the right questions.

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;475351]Yeah, I didn't consider that aspect at first. Was kind of a "d'oh!" moment when I read it.

With that bit of information, it makes it very easy to figure out, especially if you ask the server the right questions.[/QUOTE]

Well, the kind of things you and I talked about are pretty invasive and I'd frown upon anyone trying something similar (especially in a scattershot way). :smile:

All will be revealed in time anyway. Suffice to say, we have confirmation from gpuOwL and by the time George has the press release ready to go, it'll be confirmed by mlucas and cudalucas as well.

EDIT: for preda, I hope he's working on additional FFT sizes in gpuOwL. The leading edge of LL/PRP work is moving past where Prime95 uses a higher FFT, but like I said, I don't know just how fuzzy that boundary is. Soon, gpuOwL wouldn't have any compatible work if it doesn't have larger FFT available.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;475352]Well, the kind of things you and I talked about are pretty invasive and I'd frown upon anyone trying something similar (especially in a scattershot way). :smile:[/quote]

Well there is that one abusive trick I told you about, but it wasn't what I had in mind. I sent you a PM.

[quote]All will be revealed in time anyway. Suffice to say, we have confirmation from gpuOwL and by the time George has the press release ready to go, it'll be confirmed by mlucas and cudalucas as well.[/quote]

:smile:

I would guess that airsquirrels' note re. the ROE should allow anyone with access to a running gpuOwl build to narrow the possible exponent range to within 0.1%.

[QUOTE=a1call;475348]Decimal base is too arbitrary.
How many repeated digits can be found in Unary numeral system?
If the candidate is printed on a poster in base 1, what would be the height x width proportions?:smile:[/QUOTE]

I agree that we can demand more than decimal. But asking for unary is too much.
How about a compromise. I'd be completely happy with binary: How long is the longest string of 1's? :innocent:

[QUOTE=a1call;475348]Decimal base is too arbitrary.
How many repeated digits can be found in Unary numeral system?
If the candidate is printed on a poster in base 1, what would be the height x width proportions?:smile:[/QUOTE]

It'd fit on the head of a pin, but the extra-dimensional size is infinite. :smile:

Oh, here's another hint. The residue is zero. There, I've leaked it. LOL