Testing new Ranges for Sierpinski/Riesel - Page 9

pepi37 · 2015-07-25, 18:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Batalov

I can play your game!
Let me ask you: "Why is the sun blue?"
You will probably tell me: "That's just nonsense. It is not blue - it is yellow."
If you'd want to show deep knowledge you will add: "And when occasionally it appears black, that's an eclipse. It is still yellow behind the moon that occludes it. It is still not blue."

Now:

Errh... That's nonsense with all due respect to the small guy with just a little different view.
It is not being tested, and not even a millisecond is spent on it. Some nanoseconds maybe.
The only reason that it even appears (to you) to be tested is that you left it in the file by deliberately bending the rules (using the tool for what is not designed).

For sun color : yeah, we all know it is not yellow it is white. But on Earth it appear yellow, part is by our vision, part is diffraction in atmosphere, part is then we are learn Sun is yellow :)

Yes, I using tool for what he is not designed. And if I ( but I am not) a little better programmer, I will correct srbsieve for my purpose and will shut up from now to forever :) But since I am not, then I ask on forum...
Math is fun with many rules :) But until I made something wrong with my math I can bend rules, can I? :)
You , yes, you, teach me more math in last year and half then any other person ( except my dad )
Dont forget that , ever.

pepi37 · 2015-07-25, 18:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by rebirther

Is there a documentation / guide how to use srbsieve?

On first post on this thread, but since I dont understand that, I use it "my way"

KEP · 2015-07-26, 16:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogue

KEP is testing the fixed version of pfgw.

Got it, testing now, expect to have a result in a weeks time

pepi37 · 2015-07-28, 16:14

Tutorial for SRBsieve is very good.
There is only one mistake, and one process cleared out ( at least for me)

Error is last picture that shows output file is named "log", but in few steps before says

19: In the ”Filename:” field, write following entry: .txt 20: Push the Save button → This will make all your NewPGen files be named n-value_.txt
So if you rename to .log files inside srbsieve.ini should also be renamed

And process not clearly explained:

07: change the phases to match the limits of your base. Please notice that you have to use -Bspec with PFGW to find out the appropriate values for the phases. The system for the phase is, phase=nmax,amount_of_k's,optimal_sievedepth

So if someone wrote manual someone should also insert procedure for this step.

Otherwise , great manual!

wombatman · 2015-08-05, 00:56

Would it be possible to implement something where srbsieve writes the latest n to the .ini file or something? Maybe have a variable for how often it writes (every 1000 n by default or something)? I had a power outage here, and although srbsieve quickly removed all the k's that had primes found already, it still has to go through all the n values already covered for k's not yet removed. Would be handy to skip ahead on that.

firejuggler · 2015-08-05, 15:58

ok... a small test :
b:1057, k between 2 and 50000

Code:

Status (00:00:00): Started with 49999 terms
Status (00:00:00): Removed 24999 terms due to k being odd
Status (00:00:00): Removed 9848 terms due to trivial factorization
Status (00:00:00): Removed 8 terms due to MOB
Status (00:00:00): Removed 3430 terms from newpgen for n = 1: 11714 remaining
Status (00:00:00): Removed 1972 terms from newpgen for n = 2: 9742 remaining
Status (00:00:00): Removed 1263 terms from newpgen for n = 3: 8479 remaining
PFGW Version 3.7.7.64BIT.20130722.Win_Dev [GWNUM 27.11]

No factoring at all, not even trivial division
ABC File Processing for at most 1 Primes


        1 fichier(s) déplacé(s).
PFGW Version 3.7.7.64BIT.20130722.Win_Dev [GWNUM 27.11]


Status (00:02:24): Completed phase 1: 1942 remaining
PFGW Version 3.7.7.64BIT.20130722.Win_Dev [GWNUM 27.11]

No factoring at all, not even trivial division
ABC File Processing for at most 1 Primes


        1 fichier(s) déplacé(s).
PFGW Version 3.7.7.64BIT.20130722.Win_Dev [GWNUM 27.11]


Status (00:07:36): Completed phase 2: 1071 remaining
PFGW Version 3.7.7.64BIT.20130722.Win_Dev [GWNUM 27.11]

No factoring at all, not even trivial division
ABC File Processing for at most 1 Primes


        1 fichier(s) déplacé(s).
PFGW Version 3.7.7.64BIT.20130722.Win_Dev [GWNUM 27.11]


Status (00:40:19): Completed phase 3: 661 remaining
WARNING: 7056*1057^n-1 has algebraic factors.
WARNING: 22500*1057^n-1 has algebraic factors.
WARNING: 30276*1057^n-1 has algebraic factors.
PFGW Version 3.7.7.64BIT.20130722.Win_Dev [GWNUM 27.11]

No factoring at all, not even trivial division
ABC File Processing for at most 1 Primes


        1 fichier(s) déplacé(s).
PFGW Version 3.7.7.64BIT.20130722.Win_Dev [GWNUM 27.11]


Status (08:51:57): Completed phase 4: 451 remaining
WARNING: 7056*1057^n-1 has algebraic factors.
WARNING: 22500*1057^n-1 has algebraic factors.
WARNING: 22500*1057^n-1 has algebraic factors.

now to test it with the newbase script

KEP · 2015-08-05, 16:03

Yes, some sort of checkpoint feature would definently have to be nice. Even though power is 100% of the time available most of the years, where I live, other things can happen wich would make it nice to have a checkpoint of some sort. In my case, I had to redo R3 k=22.5G to k=23.0G, because ~74% in to phase 1 (n=29 to n=80), in the phase where pfgw had to go from PRP testing to -tp testing, pfgw vanished from the computers memory and srbsieve failed to see that happen and just stood idle for the entire day, while I was away for work. There was nothing I could do and I had to restart the range wich is now completing without errors. So if not to hard to implement, please Rogue see if some sort of checkpoint can be implemented, such that if srbsieve looses connection to either PFGW or srsieve, that one can use ctrl+c and restart srbsieve and takeoff from whatever point was reached, without loosing any work or having to restart an entire range

firejuggler · 2015-08-05, 19:01

ok, after thinking a bot, my earlier test sqeeem really stupid, please forget it.
for srbsieve preparation, i'll get 8 file ready.
I will now test R71, unpto k=500000 and n upto 3000

gd_barnes · 2015-08-05, 19:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by firejuggler

ok, after thinking a bot, my earlier test sqeeem really stupid, please forget it.
for srbsieve preparation, i'll get 8 file ready.
I will now test R71, unpto k=500000 and n upto 3000

What? lol

firejuggler · 2015-08-05, 20:00

my first test, testing S1057 to n=3000, with k from 2 to 50 000 was really stupid.
I abandonned the idea of running the newbase script on it.
For testing purpose, I will test R71 from k=2 to k=500 000 on both srbsieve and the newbase script.
According to http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/crus/tab/CRUS_tab.htm R71 hasn't started.

rogue · 2015-08-09, 22:30

I've posted PFGW 3.7.10 to sourceforge. I only have the Windows version posted now and the Mac and Linux versions will follow later. You must use this version with the script to ensure correct results with sorptive. In fact versions between 3.4.0 and 3.7.9 might produce the wrong results in the pl_xxx.txt files. The problem is that some numbers would not be written to pl_MOB.txt (with the new-base.txt script) that should have been. It is possible that some numbers might (although very unlikely) have made it to pl_remain.txt that really should have been in pl_MOB.txt. Fortunately it will be very easy to find any that are wrong by simply running srbsieve against a range and seeing if the pl_MOB.txt it produces has k that are still remaining.

2015-08-05, 00:56	#93
wombatman I moo ablest echo power! May 2013 2²·5·89 Posts	Checkpoint Would it be possible to implement something where srbsieve writes the latest n to the .ini file or something? Maybe have a variable for how often it writes (every 1000 n by default or something)? I had a power outage here, and although srbsieve quickly removed all the k's that had primes found already, it still has to go through all the n values already covered for k's not yet removed. Would be handy to skip ahead on that.

2015-08-05, 16:03	#95
KEP Quasi Admin Thing May 2005 2×3×7×23 Posts	Yes, some sort of checkpoint feature would definently have to be nice. Even though power is 100% of the time available most of the years, where I live, other things can happen wich would make it nice to have a checkpoint of some sort. In my case, I had to redo R3 k=22.5G to k=23.0G, because ~74% in to phase 1 (n=29 to n=80), in the phase where pfgw had to go from PRP testing to -tp testing, pfgw vanished from the computers memory and srbsieve failed to see that happen and just stood idle for the entire day, while I was away for work. There was nothing I could do and I had to restart the range wich is now completing without errors. So if not to hard to implement, please Rogue see if some sort of checkpoint can be implemented, such that if srbsieve looses connection to either PFGW or srsieve, that one can use ctrl+c and restart srbsieve and takeoff from whatever point was reached, without loosing any work or having to restart an entire range Last fiddled with by KEP on 2015-08-05 at 16:05

2015-08-05, 19:01	#96
firejuggler Apr 2010 Over the rainbow 19×137 Posts	ok, after thinking a bot, my earlier test sqeeem really stupid, please forget it. for srbsieve preparation, i'll get 8 file ready. I will now test R71, unpto k=500000 and n upto 3000 Last fiddled with by firejuggler on 2015-08-05 at 19:05

2015-08-05, 20:00	#98
firejuggler Apr 2010 Over the rainbow 19·137 Posts	my first test, testing S1057 to n=3000, with k from 2 to 50 000 was really stupid. I abandonned the idea of running the newbase script on it. For testing purpose, I will test R71 from k=2 to k=500 000 on both srbsieve and the newbase script. According to http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/crus/tab/CRUS_tab.htm R71 hasn't started. Last fiddled with by firejuggler on 2015-08-05 at 20:01

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Very Prime Riesel and Sierpinski k	robert44444uk	Open Projects	587	2016-11-13 15:26
Sierpinski/ Riesel bases 6 to 18	robert44444uk	Conjectures 'R Us	139	2007-12-17 05:17
Sierpinski/Riesel Base 10	rogue	Conjectures 'R Us	11	2007-12-17 05:08
Sierpinski / Riesel - Base 23	michaf	Conjectures 'R Us	2	2007-12-17 05:04
Sierpinski / Riesel - Base 22	michaf	Conjectures 'R Us	49	2007-12-17 05:03

2015-07-28, 16:14	#92
pepi37 Dec 2011 After milion nines:) 2³·181 Posts	Tutorial for SRBsieve is very good. There is only one mistake, and one process cleared out ( at least for me) Error is last picture that shows output file is named "log", but in few steps before says 19: In the ”Filename:” field, write following entry: .txt 20: Push the Save button → This will make all your NewPGen files be named n-value_.txt So if you rename to .log files inside srbsieve.ini should also be renamed And process not clearly explained: 07: change the phases to match the limits of your base. Please notice that you have to use -Bspec with PFGW to find out the appropriate values for the phases. The system for the phase is, phase=nmax,amount_of_k's,optimal_sievedepth So if someone wrote manual someone should also insert procedure for this step. Otherwise , great manual!

2015-08-09, 22:30	#99
rogue "Mark" Apr 2003 Between here and the 1100011010000₂ Posts	I've posted PFGW 3.7.10 to sourceforge. I only have the Windows version posted now and the Mac and Linux versions will follow later. You must use this version with the script to ensure correct results with sorptive. In fact versions between 3.4.0 and 3.7.9 might produce the wrong results in the pl_xxx.txt files. The problem is that some numbers would not be written to pl_MOB.txt (with the new-base.txt script) that should have been. It is possible that some numbers might (although very unlikely) have made it to pl_remain.txt that really should have been in pl_MOB.txt. Fortunately it will be very easy to find any that are wrong by simply running srbsieve against a range and seeing if the pl_MOB.txt it produces has k that are still remaining.