A bug or... a surprising result???... - Page 2

davieddy · 2011-06-25, 01:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by frmky

I did say *I* will know tomorrow. I don't have to tell anyone else...

If it is prime, the form is to tell George, he announces a
possible new prime and gets it "verified".

Meanwhile, we all try to guess what the exponent is...
Oops!

David

Prime95 · 2011-06-25, 02:18

Amphoria's residue is 000000000000002. This happens if the FFT data is zeroed anywhere by error during the LL test.

Shift count is zero. Probably means it wasn't prime95.

frmky · 2011-06-25, 04:09

Oh well... Guess we'll just have a triple check then.

davieddy · 2011-06-25, 09:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by frmky

Oh well... Guess we'll just have a triple check then.

Male that a double!

Brain · 2011-06-25, 20:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prime95

Amphoria's residue is 000000000000002. This happens if the FFT data is zeroed anywhere by error during the LL test.

Shift count is zero. Probably means it wasn't prime95.

I experienced this with an erroneous CUDALucas run. Beginning with iteration 11 million it constantly looped at 002.

frmky · 2011-06-26, 07:00

The first test had the correct residue. It is not prime.

davieddy · 2011-06-26, 16:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by frmky

The first test had the correct residue. It is not prime.

Proven.

Or perhaps your identical residues were down to a bug
(as yet undiscovered)?

David
Conspiracy Theorist (NOT

)

amphoria · 2011-06-26, 18:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prime95

Amphoria's residue is 000000000000002. This happens if the FFT data is zeroed anywhere by error during the LL test.

Shift count is zero. Probably means it wasn't prime95.

It was actually CUDALucas.

I see that I am not the first person to experience this.

Karl M Johnson · 2011-06-26, 18:35

I've also had this kind of issue with CUDALucas 1.0, where at some point the residue is the same over all upcoming 10k iterations.
Sometimes restoring from a checkpoint file helped(If I was fast to notice the abnormal behavior).

davieddy · 2011-06-26, 19:52

2^2 - 2 = 2

Or 0^2 - 2 = -2
(-2)^2 = 2^2

2011-06-26, 18:35	#20
Karl M Johnson Mar 2010 411₁₀ Posts	I've also had this kind of issue with CUDALucas 1.0, where at some point the residue is the same over all upcoming 10k iterations. Sometimes restoring from a checkpoint file helped(If I was fast to notice the abnormal behavior). Last fiddled with by Karl M Johnson on 2011-06-26 at 18:35

2011-06-26, 19:52	#21
davieddy "Lucan" Dec 2006 England 2·3·13·83 Posts	Needless to say... 2^2 - 2 = 2 Or 0^2 - 2 = -2 (-2)^2 = 2^2 Last fiddled with by davieddy on 2011-06-26 at 19:55

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
A surprising case of a new shiny thing being step-function better	fivemack	Astronomy	12	2017-01-24 17:49
Xyzzy, the man, the myth, the surprising but not disappointing reality	jasong	jasong	6	2016-04-26 22:41
Interesting but not surprising point-in-time stats	petrw1	PrimeNet	3	2015-09-01 19:35
A surprising result on QS/NFS matrix size	jasonp	Factoring	3	2008-01-07 20:23
Surprising news headlines	dsouza123	Soap Box	2	2007-06-26 21:41

2011-06-25, 02:18	#13
Prime95 P90 years forever! Aug 2002 Yeehaw, FL 7,537 Posts	Amphoria's residue is 000000000000002. This happens if the FFT data is zeroed anywhere by error during the LL test. Shift count is zero. Probably means it wasn't prime95.

2011-06-25, 04:09	#14
frmky Jul 2003 So Cal 2²×23² Posts	Oh well... Guess we'll just have a triple check then.

2011-06-26, 07:00	#17
frmky Jul 2003 So Cal 2²·23² Posts	The first test had the correct residue. It is not prime.