User TJAOI

[LaurV]

Originally Posted by snme2pm1

At the risk of unhelpful speculation, might there there be some lost factors due to frequent server misadventure?
To seek clarity, should the lost factors have been known prior to public acceptance of work on affected exponents?

All missing "first" factors are in a "small" range (all in 54-58 bits up to now) which was done long time ago, when PrimeNet was not so stressed, and they were done in a "very short" period of time, compared with project's life. That is why I suspected a database lost (like a partial backup restoration, or something). But no, we smell now a P95 bug in the TF code. It could not be difficult to find, someone (maybe me, later) can try to re-factor few of Tjaoi's exponents with P95 (possibly an older version).
To the second question the answer is yes, they should have been known, some wasted work would not been wasted (if I understand the question right, which I suspect I don't... )

[LaurV]

Originally Posted by snme2pm1

It would be a whole more helpful if TJAOI et al made themselves public and announced the intent and rigor of their methodology.

Methodology is very clear, see the beginning of the thread, they went "by k" to 55 bits or 56, it was getting tough (they are still doing "by k" for the last bit, see the factors they report), then they switched (in parallel) to "by p" (classic mfaktc), but they are doing bit 57 to 58 right now (which is not optimum, if they use mfaktc, as the 57-66 can be digested at once, i.e. sieved together, being much faster, but maybe Tjaoi guys are not using mfaktX, but own program).

[lycorn]

It´s almost a year (see post #111) since they started a search "by p", while continuing the systematic search by k. They seem to have different goals: by K, to catch more factors on top of the one(s) already known for each number tested; by p, looks like a kind of double-check, which has in fact found a fair amount of missed exponents.

[bloodIce]

I wonder if a factoring of the missed exponents will eventually find factors. Lets say these over 500M to TF74-75. Of course it will not find factors for all, but for what fraction it is possible. In other words, what fraction could be scavenged with further factoring.

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by Anonuser

This number is probably bigger than 200. I have found another 88 exponents. Therefore, there should be at least 60+51+88=199 exponents that have been cleared by TJAOI.

238521893 243069601 246439639 248744597 272031449 272794003 272941007 283522271 299392693 324447163 325824481
329918063 333745177 345732643 350682499 363655373 382419637 387629743 388040603 392987779 395278649 399598349
404924413 409550381 415560947 420625693 423150461 427273709 428341763 451320017 456683473 466851653 482424673
495980827 507102601 512268683 530871521 533148851 534244129 540156979 548147021 548330617 565154141 578286563
579301693 580837519 586859353 603669383 617198287 622548529 643358173 649232917 654311477 689741839 704410933
708359671 716352467 717926719 741946957 748118741 752159647 756776413 758241097 762466739 773023793 775808233
786465419 803141509 804428809 813000103 820197583 842145929 850352507 857116471 858799187 860977333 861415363
862069937 865151479 883622309 902980087 904083407 925918793 929794609 931376821 936759839 973750237 981847247

Originally Posted by LaurV

It could not be difficult to find, someone (maybe me, later) can try to re-factor few of Tjaoi's exponents with P95 (possibly an older version).

I just ran those. In each case Prime95 found a factor.

[LaurV]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

I just ran those. In each case Prime95 found a factor.

Hm ... Good job... Is there anywhere a (say) 4-5 years old copy of the DB?

[garo]

Have you considered the possibility that these factors were missed due to hardware errors?

Also, GP2 did a great analysis of factors found over a decade ago. Look that up before you do any serious analysis.

[Prime95]

Recent Cleared report changed to only report first factors for an exponent. Let me know if I broke it.

[Prime95]

Originally Posted by LaurV

Hm ... Good job... Is there anywhere a (say) 4-5 years old copy of the DB?

Scott has a ton of old log files backed up off line. I presume he has the dates in question.

I'm not sure I want to dig through that mass of data looking for patterns.

[petrw1]

Originally Posted by Prime95

Recent Cleared report changed to only report first factors for an exponent. Let me know if I broke it.

1. Could be my imagination but it seems like there is a LOT more history reported there as in about 3 days worth.

2. Also I seem to be missing about an inch of display on the right....or about the last dozen or so digits of any factor....

Neither of the above are evident the "Recent Results" report.
Mind you it seems factors (completely numeric results) are right justified on the Cleared report and EVERYTHING is left justified on the Results report.

[retina]

Originally Posted by petrw1

2. Also I seem to be missing about an inch of display on the right....or about the last dozen or so digits of any factor....

Neither of the above are evident the "Recent Results" report.
Mind you it seems factors (completely numeric results) are right justified on the Cleared report and EVERYTHING is left justified on the Results report.

It has been reported before in another thread. It is because of a silly decision to limit the width to 1000 pixels and completely ignore the browsers native ability to scroll left and right. So far the designer(s) of the page have not acknowledged it as a problem.