mersenneforum.org > Data processed dc and tc posts
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2020-07-31, 20:13 #606 kruoli     "Oliver" Sep 2017 Porta Westfalica, DE 22·73 Posts Some residue types will result in the same residue when there is no factor. But in general, you are correct. But nonetheless, we need a matching DC as long as we do not have a VDF on a run.
2020-07-31, 20:19   #607
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502

"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

206228 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Viliam Furik Shouldn't different PRP residue types produce different residues?
I am not sure. The worktodo lines (and I fixed the missing ",") I made followed ATH's info. Each of the exponents have a base 3, type 1 test.
The exponents were part of ATH's list that was posted in the TC list. I went through the list to remove them from the LL's.

As far as I understand the server is ready to receive the VDFs. I have been running PRP-CF's with VDFs and not seeing evil messages from the server.

2020-07-31, 21:19   #608
Viliam Furik

Jul 2018
Martin, Slovakia

7E16 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by kruoli Some residue types will result in the same residue when there is no factor. But in general, you are correct. But nonetheless, we need a matching DC as long as we do not have a VDF on a run.
Citation from undoc.txt of Prime95:
Code:
PRP supports 5 types of residues for compatibility with other PRP programs.  If
a is the PRP base and N is the number being tested, then the residue types are:
1 = 64-bit residue of a^(N-1), a traditional Fermat PRP test used by most other programs
2 = 64-bit residue of a^((N-1)/2)
3 = 64-bit residue of a^(N+1), only available if b=2
4 = 64-bit residue of a^((N+1)/2), only available if b=2
5 = 64-bit residue of a^(N*known_factors-1), same as type 1 if there are no known factors
To control which residue type is generated, use this setting in prime.txt:
PRPResidueType=n		(default is 5)
The residue type can also be set for PRP tests in worktodo.txt entries making
this option somewhat obsolete.
Based on this, only the types 1 and 5 should yield the same results.

 2020-08-01, 14:14 #609 ATH Einyen     Dec 2003 Denmark 3·977 Posts When there are no known factors type 5 is the same as type 1: a^(N*known_factors-1) vs a^(N-1) because known_factors=1 But you do not need to specify type, just let Prime95/mprime use the default type: PRP=1,2,84946391,-1 Gpuowl only does type1 still I believe, and unless the input format changed in the last few months it should be: PRP=,1,2,84946391,-1,75,0 Gpuowl need the ,75,0 at the end for some reason (unless this has changed lately): Code: ## worktodo.txt The lines in worktodo.txt must be of one of these forms: * 70100200 * PRP=FCECE568118E4626AB85ED36A9CC8D4F,1,2,77936867,-1,75,0
 2020-08-01, 14:16 #610 ATH Einyen     Dec 2003 Denmark 3·977 Posts This one needs a TC: 53301539 But it will be picked up automatically at any time probably.
2020-08-01, 15:09   #611
endless mike

Jan 2004
Milwaukee, WI

32·17 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by GP2 PRP checks. Note: please use V30 for these. Code: PRP=1,2,84946391,-1,76,0,3,1 PRP=1,2,84963899,-1,76,0,3,1 PRP=1,2,86291299,-1,76,0,3,1 PRP=1,2,86793229,-1,76,0,3,1 PRP=1,2,86793251,-1,76,0,3,1 .
Why version 30? And how? I tried and got an error message from the server.

 2020-08-01, 16:49 #612 ATH Einyen     Dec 2003 Denmark 3×977 Posts Version 30 has the new PRP-VDF where it only needs 1 test and a short proof validation instead of a double check. But these already has 2 PRP tests, so most likely another one will finish the double check. Try this: PRP=1,2,84946391,-1 PRP=1,2,84963899,-1 PRP=1,2,86291299,-1 PRP=1,2,86793229,-1 PRP=1,2,86793251,-1 Last fiddled with by ATH on 2020-08-01 at 16:52
2020-08-01, 18:14   #613
endless mike

Jan 2004
Milwaukee, WI

100110012 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by ATH Version 30 has the new PRP-VDF where it only needs 1 test and a short proof validation instead of a double check. But these already has 2 PRP tests, so most likely another one will finish the double check. Try this: PRP=1,2,84946391,-1 PRP=1,2,84963899,-1 PRP=1,2,86291299,-1 PRP=1,2,86793229,-1 PRP=1,2,86793251,-1
Still getting error about 'violates assignment rules' from the server. I'll run them with N/A for an AID and see what happens when they're done.

2020-08-02, 00:36   #614
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502

"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

2·4,297 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by ATH Version 30 has the new PRP-VDF where it only needs 1 test and a short proof validation instead of a double check.
Do you agree that as any new single LL runs that pop up as suspect, that we should just do a fresh PRP on v30? Roughly the same amount of time to run the test, but savings if a LL-TC were needed.

2020-08-02, 14:06   #615
ATH
Einyen

Dec 2003
Denmark

3·977 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Uncwilly Do you agree that as any new single LL runs that pop up as suspect, that we should just do a fresh PRP on v30? Roughly the same amount of time to run the test, but savings if a LL-TC were needed.
Yes, Suspect tests should be run with PRP VDF.
If there is 1 Suspect and 1 Unverified LL I guess if the person really wants they can run LL DC because in most cases probably >95% it will match the non-suspect, but PRP-VDF preferred.

2020-08-02, 15:43   #616
kruoli

"Oliver"
Sep 2017
Porta Westfalica, DE

22·73 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by ATH This one needs a TC: 53301539 But it will be picked up automatically at any time probably.
Somehow, it got TF assigned without any need. The exponent is already factored one level farther than GPU72 standard.

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post jasong Forum Feedback 1050 2019-04-29 00:50 10metreh Forum Feedback 6 2013-01-10 09:50 jasonp Forum Feedback 9 2009-07-19 17:35 edorajh Data 10 2003-11-18 11:26 Xyzzy Lounge 10 2002-11-21 00:04

All times are UTC. The time now is 19:24.

Sat Sep 19 19:24:55 UTC 2020 up 9 days, 16:35, 1 user, load averages: 1.01, 1.40, 1.45