20080724, 18:34  #1 
Jul 2006
USA (UT5) via UK (UT)
2^{2}·59 Posts 
V5 credits for trialfactoring
When credit for trialfactoring is assigned, it seems that LMHers who
continue searching to the upper limit even if factors are found don't get appropriate CPU credit. As it stands ATM, if you fail to find a factor in a given range you get far less credit than if you find one or more factors after searching the entire range. In the examples below, the exponents were trialfactored from 2^56 to 2^63. The first example is M83728693 for which no factor was found: Manual testing 83728693 NF 20080724 17:37 0.0 no factor to 2^63 0.0211 The second example is M83729053 for which one factor was found: Manual testing 83729053 F 20080724 17:37 0.0 124190339516973313 0.0001 Only 0.0001 C2GD credit (because the factor is 56.785 bits, near the bottom of the search range) even though the full range was searched. The third example is M83728691 for which three factors were found: Manual testing 83728691 F 20080724 17:37 0.0 7095143239736076169 0.0151 Manual testing 83728691 F 20080724 17:37 0.0 6826447540875924881 0.0136 Manual testing 83728691 F 20080724 17:37 0.0 1794036397145430497 0.0020 Here the total credit is 0.0307 C2GD, which is more than 0.0211 but still doesn't seem right. Perhaps the proper credit for a trialfactoring that examines the whole range should be something like: Credit = Range_Credit * ( 1 + n * Factor_Credit) where Range_Credit is the credit for searching the range (in the examples, this would be 0.0211 C2GD) n is the number of factors found in the range and Factor_Credit is the bonus for finding factors (it is a number in the range 0 < Factor_Credit <= 1 [I would choose this to be 1/3]) So the three examples would net me 0.0211, 0.0281 and 0.0422 C2GD, for finding zero, one and three factors. This would require the manual form scripts to recognize (in some fashion) when the entire range is being searched. (If using Prime95 and the default "stop processing when a factor is found" option is in use, the formats would be unchanged.) So rather than reporting: UID: GrunwalderGIMP/Alpha, M83743633 has no factor to 2^63 one would report something like: UID: GrunwalderGIMP/Alpha, M83743633 has no factor from 2^56 to 2^63 when no factors are found and UID: GrunwalderGIMP/Alpha, M83728691 has a factor: 1794036397145430497 in the range 2^56 to 2^63 UID: GrunwalderGIMP/Alpha, M83728691 has a factor: 6826447540875924881 in the range 2^56 to 2^63 UID: GrunwalderGIMP/Alpha, M83728691 has a factor: 7095143239736076169 in the range 2^56 to 2^63 The logic required by the manual submission forms to interpret these modified formats is trivial. Just my 2c. 
20080725, 02:33  #2 
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
3^{2}·19·43 Posts 
Since factoring a Mersenne number to find multiple factors is a nonstandard activity, I'm not inclined to devote much effort into making sure it is superaccurately credited.

20080725, 15:21  #3 
Sep 2002
450_{8} Posts 
Oh Snap

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
What is the formula for factoring credits?  petrw1  PrimeNet  20  20070627 14:42 
trial factoring and P1  jocelynl  Math  8  20060201 14:12 
over trial factoring  JFB  Software  23  20040822 05:37 
How to only do Trial Factoring?  michael  Software  23  20040106 08:54 
About trial factoring  gbvalor  Math  4  20030522 02:04 