Bases 501-1030 reservations/statuses/primes

[rebirther]

Reserving S708 to n=100k (25-100k) for BOINC

[pepi37]

Reserving S808 as new up to 25K

[gd_barnes]

Originally Posted by pepi37

S708 if finished.
49K remains
ABCD file with all K remain up to 100K sent to Rebirther to process on SRBase-Boinc
Base released - results attached

Originally Posted by rebirther

Reserving S708 to n=100k (25-100k) for BOINC

Pepi and wombatman, PLEASE STOP all work using srbsieve!! Reb, please stop S708 immediately in BOINC. There are far more k's remaining than what Pepi sent you.

I found it highly unlikely that there would be only 49 k's remaining at n=25K for S708 because I had run this base to n=2500 in the recommended bases thread. There were 701 k's remaining at n=2500! That is far too large of a reduction so I began checking the primes file. There are many composites. In the first 1000 k's, here is a balancing of what I found:
845 primes shown in file
163 were actually composite
682 true primes

Attached is my PFGW run showing 163 composites. I ran my old reliable PFGW 3.3.6 against the primes file. I independently checked 30-40 of the composites at the factoring db. All had factors. The most surprising of all was the very first one:
2*708^1+1 = 13 * 109 (!!??)

Besides the first one, it appears that all of the remaining composites are from n=7 to 50.

Many of the k's with composites would prime at larger n-values n<25K but not all. With > 700 k's remaining at n=2500, there should likely be 200-300 k's remaining at n=25K.

Mark, I am concerned about the continual corrections to srbsieve that I am seeing in the "Testing new Ranges for Sierpinski/Riesel" thread. We cannot "test in production" on this project. We need independent parallel tests run on many different bases before bases are submitted for work here. I am not convinced that that is happening. (I did it myself on base 3 and it looked good.) My question is: Is this an srbsieve issue or are the users not using it properly or do they have possible bad versions of NewPGen, PFGW, LLR, or srsieve in their folder when running the program?

For people who have been at CRUS < 1 year, I would prefer it if they would work with people who have more experience with the project when running new bases. Starting new bases is the most challenging thing that we do here. S708 did not pass the smell test. 49 k's remaining is very unlikely for such a high base with such a high conjecture and should have been independently verified.

[rebirther]

ok, thats very bad. I have cancelled the base S708.

[gd_barnes]

For independent verification of S708, attached are all primes and k's remaining at n=2500. Also included is the starting bases script that I used.

[pepi37]

Thanks for warning. All is stopped!

[wombatman]

If I am currently running with pfgw (since srbsieve was having the checkpointing problem), can I continue on the ones I started? I'm also willing to verify the "primes" in pl_prime to confirm that they are actually primes. And if any turn out not to be, I can re-run that particular k up to the same n as the others.

If, however, that's not acceptable, please let me know and I'll stop.

Edit: Nevermind, I saw your request for the new-base script results as well, so I'll just do that to try and verify.

[rogue]

Originally Posted by gd_barnes

Mark, I am concerned about the continual corrections to srbsieve that I am seeing in the "Testing new Ranges for Sierpinski/Riesel" thread. We cannot "test in production" on this project. We need independent parallel tests run on many different bases before bases are submitted for work here. I am not convinced that that is happening. (I did it myself on base 3 and it looked good.) My question is: Is this an srbsieve issue or are the users not using it properly or do they have possible bad versions of NewPGen, PFGW, LLR, or srsieve in their folder when running the program?

The last version before I added the recovery logic is good. They are not sieving properly with newpgen. That is being discussed in the other thread.

[paleseptember]

Starting R576 from new using the NewBases v4.3 script. CK is 30651.

[MyDogBuster]

Starting R576 from new using the NewBases v4.3 script. CK is 30651.

R576 is already at n=25K. Do you mean S576?

[paleseptember]

Originally Posted by MyDogBuster

R576 is already at n=25K. Do you mean S576?

Curses and phooey. Yes, S576. Thankfully it was churning away for <3 hours. I can't edit my original post, so let's say that I'm taking S576 from new with the NewBases script. AFAICS it's the lowest CK unstarted.