![]() |
|
|
#100 | |
|
Quasi Admin Thing
May 2005
2·3·7·23 Posts |
Quote:
and you were right... this just shows that you've way more insight than me ... so to Gary and anyone else, good luck on what you might decide to run!Kenneth |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#101 |
|
Jun 2003
Oxford, UK
36278 Posts |
I'm running Sierpinski 3, but the computer has been going for over a week on 360-cover !! This is a case where I think that mooted k is the lowest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#102 | |
|
May 2008
22 Posts |
Quote:
Finally the old draft is public some 18 months late... http://www.utm.edu/staff/caldwell/preprints/2to100.pdf Any comments, corrections, ... welcome. Most of what we had done is now duplicated by others--and of course for many bases you have searched far further. CC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#103 | |
|
May 2007
Kansas; USA
101×103 Posts |
Quote:
I got the draft that you sent in an Email and have been taking a look at it over the last few days. I have a couple of comments but will reserve those until I'm done in the next couple of days. To all: Now that Chris has made this public info., I'll see about getting our web pages updated to include all of the Sierp conjectures up to base 100 over the next few weeks. One note though: The k's remaining in the paper on the various bases do not relieve of us of finding the primes hence new bases still need to be started from scratch. One thing that is different in the paper than what we are doing here: Prof. Caldwell's group allowed k's with all or partial algebraic factors to be the lowest conjectured k-value with a covering set. For this project, we only allow 'numeric' covering sets (i.e. no algebraic factors) to be the conjectured k-value. The reason for this is that it would make for extremely low conjectures on the Riesel side for any base that was a perfect square and hence rather 'uninestering' in both a project and a mathematical sense. Although less apparent on the Sierp side, it also leads to some 'less interesting' conjectures from a project perspective. The best example there is base 16, which would have an easily proven conjecture of k=2500. So for the purposes of this project, we eliminate k's from consideration that have all or partial algebraic factors for the same reason that we eliminate k's with a single trivial factor. Chris, I was able to conclude that your group had searched most bases to n=30K-40K. Is that correct? If you have any detailed info. about primes found, search ranges, etc. on the various bases, could you forward them to me? Thanks, Gary |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#104 | |
|
May 2008
22 Posts |
Quote:
are all still intact. If you want it sooner I can send all without cleaning things up. I also updated the paper slightly. I noticed my versions were out of sync and the one which referenced Gerbicz fine program was not there. Comparing to his program found a small error in his program which he has since fixed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#105 | |
|
May 2007
Kansas; USA
101×103 Posts |
Quote:
Yes, November would be fine. That's excellent that you still have the pfgw logs available so those would be greatly helpful. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#106 |
|
May 2007
Kansas; USA
242438 Posts |
I moved several posts that had specific testing statuses, primes, and k's remaining for Riesel base 3 to the "Riesel base 3 statuses thread" and for Riesel base 15 to "Bases <= 32 statuses thread".
I was having a heck of a time verifying some statuses on old base 15 efforts for web page updates until I finally found some here. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Bases 2 & 4 reservations/statuses/primes | Jean Penné | Conjectures 'R Us | 466 | 2021-07-25 04:05 |
| Prime finding rate, Sierp vs. Riesel? | CGKIII | Conjectures 'R Us | 27 | 2012-09-12 23:16 |
| Riesel and Sierp numbers bases <= 1024 | R. Gerbicz | Conjectures 'R Us | 22 | 2009-12-29 20:21 |
| Sieving Riesel & Sierp base 16 | gd_barnes | Conjectures 'R Us | 13 | 2009-12-14 09:23 |
| Sierpinski/ Riesel bases 6 to 18 | robert44444uk | Conjectures 'R Us | 139 | 2007-12-17 05:17 |