Error rates revealed

Prime95 · 2002-08-31, 00:27

A user has broken down the GIMPS error rate for exponents
between 2 million and 7 million. See ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/err_rate.xls
I'd ignore the data from 6 million to 7 million as there are many triple-checks to be done. The data from 5 million to 6 million will not change much at all. The
data from 2 million to 5 million is accurate.

There is a lot of interesting data in this spreadsheet. Our overall error rate is roughly 3.5%. If you have an error-free run, the error rate is in the 1.4% to 2% area. If you have an SUM(INPUTS) != SUM(OUTPUTS) error or ROUNDOFF > 0.40 error that is not caused by an approaching FFT crossover, then there is a 56% chance that your LL test will be no good!

Prime95 · 2002-09-01, 00:10

Our intrepid researcher broke down the non-clean run stats below. So if you
get a single error, you've got a 2/3 chance of being OK. Two or more errors
and your chances are not good. This is not broken down by error type
(SUM(INPUTS) != SUM(OUTPUTS) vs. ROUNDOFF > 0.4)

Number of errors reported bad good error_rate
1 314 625 33.4%
2 192 135 58.7%
3 107 63 62.9%
4 74 36 67.3%
5 53 17 75.7%
6 48 20 70.6%
7 31 7 81.6%
8 30 10 75.0%
9 17 10 63.0%
10 25 2 92.6%
>10 375 58 86.6%

2002-08-31, 00:27	#1
Prime95 P90 years forever! Aug 2002 Yeehaw, FL 2×53×71 Posts	Error rates revealed A user has broken down the GIMPS error rate for exponents between 2 million and 7 million. See ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/err_rate.xls I'd ignore the data from 6 million to 7 million as there are many triple-checks to be done. The data from 5 million to 6 million will not change much at all. The data from 2 million to 5 million is accurate. There is a lot of interesting data in this spreadsheet. Our overall error rate is roughly 3.5%. If you have an error-free run, the error rate is in the 1.4% to 2% area. If you have an SUM(INPUTS) != SUM(OUTPUTS) error or ROUNDOFF > 0.40 error that is not caused by an approaching FFT crossover, then there is a 56% chance that your LL test will be no good!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Electrical Service Rates	storm5510	Hardware	70	2019-10-14 21:14
Names of future Intel microarchitectures revealed?	ixfd64	Hardware	3	2011-04-30 13:04
error rates and P-1 test	drakkar67	Prime Sierpinski Project	9	2008-05-26 14:29
error rates	drakkar67	Prime Sierpinski Project	12	2006-04-21 17:26
Error Rates	Prime95	Math	31	2002-09-06 14:34

2002-09-01, 00:10	#2
Prime95 P90 years forever! Aug 2002 Yeehaw, FL 2·53·71 Posts	Our intrepid researcher broke down the non-clean run stats below. So if you get a single error, you've got a 2/3 chance of being OK. Two or more errors and your chances are not good. This is not broken down by error type (SUM(INPUTS) != SUM(OUTPUTS) vs. ROUNDOFF > 0.4) Number of errors reported bad good error_rate 1 314 625 33.4% 2 192 135 58.7% 3 107 63 62.9% 4 74 36 67.3% 5 53 17 75.7% 6 48 20 70.6% 7 31 7 81.6% 8 30 10 75.0% 9 17 10 63.0% 10 25 2 92.6% >10 375 58 86.6%