All things doublecheck!!

[axn]

132224*5^47398-1 is prime!
239314*5^47493-1 is prime!
278974*5^47619-1 is prime!

[axn]

192652*5^49189-1 is prime!

[axn]

178492*5^49463-1 is prime!

[axn]

17978*5^54036-1 is prime!

[michaf]

Congrats... with yet another DC-prime...
Please get those DC-candidates in LLR-Net as soon as possible :>
(Or at least upto 70k or so, or let it lag behind on the first try some 50k)

[ltd]

As a first step i have released all sierpinski k/n pairs lower then n=20k.

Lars

Edit:

Please tell me what we want to do with riesel base and when i should release the next set of sierpinski values?

[michaf]

Originally Posted by ltd

As a first step i have released all sierpinski k/n pairs lower then n=20k.

Lars

Edit:

Please tell me what we want to do with riesel base and when i should release the next set of sierpinski values?

I'm crunching away on the lowest part now... WOW :) that's quick :)
I'll notify on here when I'm through with these...

BTW It felt like I didn't start crunching from the start (As in, not from the 1k the stats page says it misses results from...)
Or some even from n=169

[axn]

Originally Posted by ltd

As a first step i have released all sierpinski k/n pairs lower then n=20k.

Lars

Edit:

Please tell me what we want to do with riesel base and when i should release the next set of sierpinski values?

Sierpinskis have been "doublechecked" to quite high levels by masser (in fact 3 doublecheck primes were found). I am actually waiting for his residues. Anyway, at this moment I don't see much of a need for a coordinated doublecheck (the current private effort is more than sufficient to keep up with first time test).

Having said that, I would like to have residues available for all k/n pairs in the first time queue. I would suggest that we wait for another week so that everyone can turn in their residues (if any remaining) -- and then we can open up the ones without residue for first time testing

I would like to hear other people's views on this.

EDIT:- Let the current ones (Sieprinski < 20k) be tested to completion. I am pretty sure no one has residues lying around for those. masser's residues can be counted as dc

[michaf]

Originally Posted by axn1

Sierpinskis have been "doublechecked" to quite high levels by masser (in fact 3 doublecheck primes were found). I am actually waiting for his residues. Anyway, at this moment I don't see much of a need for a coordinated doublecheck (the current private effort is more than sufficient to keep up with first time test).

Having said that, I would like to have residues available for all k/n pairs in the first time queue. I would suggest that we wait for another week so that everyone can turn in their residues (if any remaining) -- and then we can open up the ones without residue for first time testing

I would like to hear other people's views on this.

EDIT:- Let the current ones (Sieprinski < 20k) be tested to completion. I am pretty sure no one has residues lying around for those. masser's residues can be counted as dc

I suspect that all known residues will be in by now.
I suggest we indeed open the pairs without residue for first time testing then (if only it looks weird that we haven't tested some low pairs...)

As far as the double check goes, I think we need to get it up to a point where we can say that we have at least confidence that no little primes are left in there (let's say that is all below 20k)

And besides, I don't think running the checks upto 20k will take too much of a time; already on 6k now

[axn]

Originally Posted by michaf

Congrats... with yet another DC-prime...
Please get those DC-candidates in LLR-Net as soon as possible :>
(Or at least upto 70k or so, or let it lag behind on the first try some 50k)

50k lag is too close! But anyway, even with just one machine on doublecheck, I can comfortably keep the gap between first pass and dc at around 50k So I don't think at this point we need a doublecheck queue in LLRNet server. Once first pass has gone beyond 200k, we can think of adding a dc queue.

The main problem right now is that we dont have any good error statistics for prp tests. Otherwise we could've decided on an "optimal" dc strategy.

Right now our best bet is to concentrate on first time tests for finding a prime (despite the bundles of dc primes found recently ). Plus, our only hope of getting into Top 5000 list is to advance the first time test.

[ltd]

Error rates are not a problem with these short running tests. Even at PSP where n is>2880000 there is no need for DC.

It is more about tests never done due to errors.

I did not know that there has been an effort by masser to check the low sierpinski numbers eles i would not have released them.

I promise next time i will ask before doing something stupid.

Lars