View Single Post
Old 2003-09-27, 18:10   #8
NickGlover
 
NickGlover's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Richland, WA

22×3×11 Posts
Default Re: Exponents that haven't had a P-1 test done

Quote:
Originally posted by GP2

I'm not sure why the count [for double-checked exponents with P-1 done] picks up sharply in the 9M range after steadily declining. Any ideas? [/B]
I figured this out. I think it is because of TempleU-CAS (combined with TempleU-DI in George's files). Earlier this year, TempleU-CAS ramped up his production by putting Prime95 on lots of P4s in computer labs on the Temple University campus. He puts these P4s (which all have the same computer name; FL-SLE) all on double-checks. This occurred right about when GIMPS started handing out 9M double-checks.

Being currently the third highest LL (double-checks and first-time tests) producer (see http://www.teamprimerib.com/rr1/topover.htm), with almost all of his computing power focused on double-checks, he ends up doing a sizable percentage of the double-checks that are completed. I've noticed that his computers don't seem to do P-1 very often, which probably means he has intentionally turned it off because it doesn't give credit proportional to the amount of work done. So, I think the larger number of exponents in the 9M's without P-1 is due TempleU-CAS not doing P-1 while completing a sizable percentage of the double-checks. He will probably have a similar effect on the 10M range (though it won't be noticable compared to the 9M range).
NickGlover is offline   Reply With Quote