Help needed for doublecheck sieving!

[AES]

ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/

I think you can use any version of p95 to stress test. The 25.x versions have the m-t.

[Mini-Geek]

http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=9779
25.6 is the newest. 32-bit Windows is at ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/p95v256.zip, there's other versions at the link.

[Mini-Geek]

523-546 is complete. Factors sent in two e-mails (523-530 and 531-546).
Oops, I just noticed a mistake in my dividing of the ranges. I have no factors for 530-531. I'll get started on that now. It won't finish before I go to bed tonight, so if someone wants to get it before tomorrow GMT you'll need to do it yourself. Please post here if you are so I can stop running it.
523-546 is almost complete.
Edit: Never mind that about not finishing tonight, I'm splitting the remaining G between my cores and it will finish before. Expect it in about 90 minutes.

[Mini-Geek]

Originally Posted by Mini-Geek

523-546 is complete. Factors sent in two e-mails (523-530 and 531-546).
Oops, I just noticed a mistake in my dividing of the ranges. I have no factors for 530-531. I'll get started on that now. It won't finish before I go to bed tonight, so if someone wants to get it before tomorrow GMT you'll need to do it yourself. Please post here if you are so I can stop running it.
523-546 is almost complete.
Edit: Never mind that about not finishing tonight, I'm splitting the remaining G between my cores and it will finish before. Expect it in about 90 minutes.

Okay, it's done and factors are sent. Now we're done with the doublecheck sieving.

[mdettweiler]

Originally Posted by gd_barnes

Now, don't let me influence you. lmao

Not a clue on the amount of time. I will guess that on average, it would be ~10-14 days for 3 k's but maybe 7-10 days. I'll speculate about as long as a drive 3 range at about n=340K. Somewhat large but not too bad.

Here's a suggestion that should allow people with all different resources to easily reserve files of the size that they want: Kosmaj does it and it's a very good idea (I bet you never thought you'd hear that, lol). Put the number of k/n pairs by the file link. Since there will be quite a bit of variability in file-size, if you have about 10-20 3-k files posted, people with more resources can take the bigger ones and with less resources can take the smaller ones. So that we aren't testing all over the place at once, posting no more than 20 files at a time keeps it managable.

Okay, I'll be sure to do that.

You could do this any myriad of ways. One suggestion might be to post a group of 10 files for k=2-32 and another group of 10 files for k=300-330. Probably the very low k-ranges will be pretty accurate so to get some 'bang for our buck', doing both at the same time would make it more 'fun' so to speak.

Yeah, that sounds like a good idea--as the saying goes, "variety is the spice of life".

Not that I need to beat a dead horse anymore but another reason that I now remember why it was so helpful to search by k-value is that some single k-values had several errors while other entire 100-k ranges had none. I found one k that had 3 missing primes. Obviously the same person(s) searched (or didn't search) the completed ranges at PrimeSearch. When we find a missing prime, we'll want to pay close attention to that k-value and any k-values around it that might have been originally tested by the same person(s) at PrimeSearch.

There is one main case against searching by k-value that I forgot about. Do we anticipate that an LLRnet server will be used for this AND will there potentially be a large number of participants using that server? All of my logic flies out the window in that case. If we can utilize a server and we have large #'s of resources, we'll finish so quickly that it doesn't really matter how we test. We'll just confirm everything at the end after sorting by k. We could set one up right away but limit the # of people using it at n=100K (i.e. encouraging people to do manual reservations if we near a perceived problem processing point on the server) and then open it up to more people as we progress upwards. THAT is a very good case for searching by n-value!!

I'd actually rather not have an LLRnet server for this doublecheck effort. Why not? Because I want to strictly make sure that only machines for which we are absolutely confident of their accuracy are crunching for it. That, and because most of the range contains candidates that are so small they would make even one of IronBits' servers go bonkers.

When we've finished this effort, however, the next range that we'll be doing (I'm thinking 260K-400K), we'll already have first-pass residuals for (at least for 300<k<1001), so any machines can participate--even those of questionable reliability (since we'll be checking the residuals with the first-pass ones, and doing a third time the ones that don't match). Not to mention that we'll already have a nice sieve file for the 300<k<1001 part, so we can jump right into the LLRing for that range of k's.

[mdettweiler]

Originally Posted by Mini-Geek

523-546 is complete. Factors sent in two e-mails (523-530 and 531-546).
Oops, I just noticed a mistake in my dividing of the ranges. I have no factors for 530-531. I'll get started on that now. It won't finish before I go to bed tonight, so if someone wants to get it before tomorrow GMT you'll need to do it yourself. Please post here if you are so I can stop running it.
523-546 is almost complete.
Edit: Never mind that about not finishing tonight, I'm splitting the remaining G between my cores and it will finish before. Expect it in about 90 minutes.

Originally Posted by Mini-Geek

Okay, it's done and factors are sent. Now we're done with the doublecheck sieving.

Woo hoo! I'll get the factors removed from the master sieve file shortly, and then send the file to Gary for removal of algebraic factors.

Thanks a whole lot to all those who helped with the sieving! As soon as I get the sieve file back from Gary with algebraic factors removed, I'll divide it up by k for LLRing like we had decided, and post some files for reservation.

[mdettweiler]

Sieve file has been sent to Gary for algebraic factor removal.

BTW, for those who might be interested, here's the full list of gaps (please note that there were a lot less individual gaps originally, but I tried to split them up so that the ranges I handed out to others were in even blocks of G):

317926478400-318G         DONE (me)
318G-320G                 DONE (IronBits)
320G-340G                 DONE (Mini-Geek)
340G-341069648838         DONE (me)
349978926072-350G         DONE (me)
350G-384G                 DONE (IronBits)
384G-384001040658         DONE (me)
394027875348-407002241598 DONE (me)
417854172752-418G         DONE (me)
418G-427G                 DONE (IronBits)
427G-427001948518         DONE (me)
438049468562-439G         DONE (me)
439G-460G                 DONE (Mini-Geek)
460G-460003046860         DONE (me)
472743276168-473G         DONE (me)
473G-495G                 DONE (Mini-Geek)
495G-495007081578         DONE (me)
522735017258-523G         DONE (me)
523G-546G                 DONE (Mini-Geek)
546G-546736868400         DONE (me)
549991070792-550G         DONE (me)

[gd_barnes]

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Sieve file has been sent to Gary for algebraic factor removal.

BTW, for those who might be interested, here's the full list of gaps (please note that there were a lot less individual gaps originally, but I tried to split them up so that the ranges I handed out to others were in even blocks of G):

317926478400-318G         DONE (me)
318G-320G                 DONE (IronBits)
320G-340G                 DONE (Mini-Geek)
340G-341069648838         DONE (me)
349978926072-350G         DONE (me)
350G-384G                 DONE (IronBits)
384G-384001040658         DONE (me)
394027875348-407002241598 DONE (me)
417854172752-418G         DONE (me)
418G-427G                 DONE (IronBits)
427G-427001948518         DONE (me)
438049468562-439G         DONE (me)
439G-460G                 DONE (Mini-Geek)
460G-460003046860         DONE (me)
472743276168-473G         DONE (me)
473G-495G                 DONE (Mini-Geek)
495G-495007081578         DONE (me)
522735017258-523G         DONE (me)
523G-546G                 DONE (Mini-Geek)
546G-546736868400         DONE (me)
549991070792-550G         DONE (me)

Nice work divvying up that mess Anon. And thanks to IronBits and Mini-Geek for chipping in their resources to get this done very quickly!

1401 algebraic factors have been removed and the file has been sent back to Anon in an Email.

It's double-check time. Let's fire away and find some missing or incorrect primes! (lol)


Gary

[Mini-Geek]

Originally Posted by Anonymous

317926478400-318G         DONE (me)
318G-320G                 DONE (IronBits)
320G-340G                 DONE (Mini-Geek)
340G-341069648838         DONE (me)
349978926072-350G         DONE (me)
350G-384G                 DONE (IronBits)
384G-384001040658         DONE (me)
394027875348-407002241598 DONE (me)
417854172752-418G         DONE (me)
418G-427G                 DONE (IronBits)
427G-427001948518         DONE (me)
438049468562-439G         DONE (me)
439G-460G                 DONE (Mini-Geek)
460G-460003046860         DONE (me)
472743276168-473G         DONE (me)
473G-495G                 DONE (Mini-Geek)
495G-495007081578         DONE (me)
522735017258-523G         DONE (me)
523G-546G                 DONE (Mini-Geek)
546G-546736868400         DONE (me)
549991070792-550G         DONE (me)

With this and the stats on the first page, I got together some stats about how much each person sieved. Full XLS is attached (remove .txt), but here's the summary (sorted by p):

In Jasong's range:
JasonG:      92484408902
Mini-Geek:   86000000000
IronBits:    45000000000
Anonymous:   16515591098

Total:
Flatlander: 210000000000
JasonG:      92484408902
Mini-Geek:   86000000000
gd_barnes:   60000000000
Anonymous:   56515591098
IronBits:    45000000000
Kman1293:    30000000000
AES:         20000000000

Despite the mess he left us with, JasonG was the second-largest siever.

[Flatlander]

Originally Posted by gd_barnes

After removing all the factors, be sure and run the file by me first for removal of algebraic factors for k=9, 27, 81, 225, 243, 441, and 729 unless you want to mess with that.
Gary

At the risk of looking stupid(er), what about k = 25, 125, 625?

[mdettweiler]

Originally Posted by Flatlander

At the risk of looking stupid(er), what about k = 25, 125, 625?

Hmm...Gary, did you remove algebraic factors for those? If not, no big deal, it only means a few more candidates in the sieve than otherwise.

BTW all, I've got the sieve file (with algebraic factors removed) split up and some files uploaded to my web hosting space. I'll make a "Doublecheck Drive #1" thread soon, stay tuned.