I guess that we're not connecting on this issue.
Yes I am aware that .ca processing occurs at some hours after 00:00 UTC.
Yet multiple factor found results were not recorded as such at .ca until a further 24 hours, plus those lazy hours, in the mean time being recorded instead differently, but distinctly not recorded as factor found.

Suitable TF target indication
 

I was quite pleased to see the yellow background on cells (introduced many months ago) to indicate at least one marker of tour destination being achieved.
Is there warranted a second level marker, or should it be best simply imagined three more steps would be admirable, which is the way that I am inclined so far?

[QUOTE=snme2pm1;548684]I was quite pleased to see the yellow background on cells (introduced many months ago) to indicate at least one marker of tour destination being achieved. Is there warranted a second level marker, or should it be best simply imagined three more steps would be admirable, which is the way that I am inclined so far?[/QUOTE]Do you mean the yellow background as shown on the [url=www.mersenne.ca/status/tf]TF Status Report[/url] or on the [url=https://www.mersenne.ca/tf1G]tf1G page[/url]?

The TF Status Report has yellow highlighting on the "target" TF level, approximating the TF level to which GPU72 will assign exponents (and 4 bit levels above PrimeNet TF level). There might be small variations between these targets and what GPU72 actually assigns, but it should be pretty close. I wouldn't make any effort to TF beyond this level, the effort could probably be better spent elsewhere.

The tf1G page has yellow highlighting on the bit level that will require at least 1 GHz-day of effort, below that no individual record of work is retained (unless a factor is found). The target TF level is listed in the cyan column and is about 10 bit levels off the chart.

Here's a [URL="https://www.mersenne.ca/exponent/14025313"]curious case[/URL]. Did someone really trial-factor this exponent to 2^99?

I would guess that was found via P-1 and just submitted

It might makes sense that the default behavior of the server is to assume 'naked' factors were found by trial factoring. However, for bookkeeping purposes and subsequent factor searches, that report is misleading. There could be more factors below 2^99. If a factor is found by ECM, there's even a chance that the P-1 bounds listed here aren't accurate.

[QUOTE=masser;549136]It might makes sense that the default behavior of the server is to assume 'naked' factors were found by trial factoring. However, for bookkeeping purposes and subsequent factor searches, that report is misleading. There could be more factors below 2^99. If a factor is found by ECM, there's even a chance that the P-1 bounds listed here aren't accurate.[/QUOTE]

The factor was found in 2001. Probably the server recorded it as TF at the time. James needs to manually correct it.

[QUOTE=masser;549133]Here's a [URL="https://www.mersenne.ca/exponent/14025313"]curious case[/URL]. Did someone really trial-factor this exponent to 2^99?[/QUOTE]No. Nor did someone TF to 2[sup]209[/sup] on [url=https://www.mersenne.ca/exponent/3643]M3643[/url], as it was saying until now. It was some leftover code from some time long ago that was pulling data from a place that no longer made sense, and creating false TF records based on the size of the largest found factor. This is obviously incorrect. I have found and removed said code, so the results should be sane again now (if you look at a recently-viewed exponent you may need to Ctrl-F5 forcibly refresh the page to see the false entry disappear).

Thanks for reporting.

[QUOTE=masser;549133]Here's a [URL="https://www.mersenne.ca/exponent/14025313"]curious case[/URL]. Did someone really trial-factor this exponent to 2^99?[/QUOTE]

This page shows TF to 66 only.
[url]https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=14025313&exp_hi=&full=1[/url]
PrimeNet will know it wasn't TF'd to 99.

[QUOTE=petrw1;549143]This page shows TF to 66 only.
[url]https://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=14025313&exp_hi=&full=1[/url]
PrimeNet will know it wasn't TF'd to 99.[/QUOTE]
I am doing some TF on that right now. Firs step is taking it to 70. Then I will do more when I get some Colab time.

[edit]Correction, I will only take it to 70, which is 1 step beyond the GPU72 level. 65 was the default PrimeNet level.[/edit]

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;549142]I have found and removed said code, so the results should be sane again now (if you look at a recently-viewed exponent you may need to Ctrl-F5 forcibly refresh the page to see the false entry disappear).[/QUOTE]

Will that only work for new factors? I looked up M3643 and it shows an actual TF limit of 2[SUP]209[/SUP] even after Ctrl+F5 and the same on a fresh browser installation on another machine.