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

2020-03-29, 20:13   #353
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502

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

32·5·11·17 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by phillipsjk Let's see if it really finishes in 2 months as predicted. My computer that can't seem to process 100M+ exponents in a timely manner may have found a niche with this thread.
You may want to grab the lowest exponents off the list. But, this might be your niche.

2020-03-30, 04:08   #354
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter

Jun 2011
Thailand

5×11×157 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Runtime Error My question: is this working as intended?
Quote:
 Originally Posted by phillipsjk Sounds like a bug. This may be vulnerable to a replay attack, since you will have access to the full residues.
It works as intended.

You are ok, right now I assume no action will be taken as long as you don't continue to do that. Sometimes we need triple and quadruple checks for "suspect" results (and there are ways to identify such, behind of what you see on the web), and it should be normal that people who do TC/QC tests get their credits.

On the other hand, if somebody tries to "inflate his credits" by repeatedly doing tricks like that, he will be very fast spotted by the wolves lurking here around (I mean human wolves, not bots ) who have nothing to do all day but watching what other users do (this is said with no disrespect!).

In general, fast advancing in tops is immediately spotted by somebody, and the fast runner will be dissected not only with the scalpel, but mostly with a handsaw too, hehe. We are kind of a "tough community" here. In the good sense, of course. In the past, when such profiteers were found, George used to adjust their credits into the negatives, so whoever tried to take advantage of the system would have to work for some weeks to reach zero, and start fresh again. So, beware

Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2020-03-30 at 04:23

2020-03-30, 16:36   #355
Runtime Error

Sep 2017
USA

3×43 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by LaurV It works as intended.
Good to know, thanks!

2020-03-31, 15:29   #356
kriesel

"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest

23×232 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by ATH PRP=EDDC25414116177C4F046D79BE11A463,1,2,96365519,-1,76,0,3,1 Added the 2 extra arguments that can be in the assignment: ",3,1" 1,2,96365519,-1: Number to test: 1 * 296365519 - 1 76: Trial factored to 276 0: Not sure about this one. (Maybe if P-1 has been done or not? or how many PRP tests has already been done on the exponent?) 3: PRP base 3. This is always 3 as standard for normal GIMPS candidates. 1: PRP type 1. This can vary between 1-5, but mostly 1 or 4 for older gpuowl tests. Prime95 and newer gpuowl versions and Mlucas? default to type 1 (and Prime95 uses type 5 for PRP-CF tests on exponents with known factor(s)). Both PRP base and PRP type has to be the same for the PRPDC test as the original PRP test. PRP type from undoc.txt, the "(default is 5)" is only for PRP-CF tests, the type number is 1 on normal PRP tests. 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.
And also for base >3, some versions of gpuowl, PRP res type 0.
Gpuowl supported PRP res type was 1 for some versions, 4 for others, 1 currently.

Worktodo formats for all common applications are described in https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...8&postcount=22

Last fiddled with by kriesel on 2020-03-31 at 15:31

2020-03-31, 15:42   #357
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502

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

32·5·11·17 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by kriesel And also for base >3, some versions of gpuowl, PRP res type 0. Gpuowl supported PRP res type was 1 for some versions, 4 for others, 1 currently. Worktodo formats for all common applications are described in https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...8&postcount=22
This is not a commentary thread. If you want to add info to the quoted post, send me a pm with the specific changes or an new version of that post. Your post that I have quoted will be moved or wished away into the cornfield.

 2020-03-31, 17:40 #358 kriesel     "TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17" Mar 2017 US midwest 23×232 Posts LL triple check needed Doublecheck=126745771,80,1 Prime95 or mprime with Jacobi check, random offset is recommended for triple check. https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...6745771&full=1 Second run was on my generally very reliable GTX1080. Selected interim residues for check against triple check run follow. The log file contains such lines at 50,000-iteration intervals. Offset for the run: offset = 63381765. Code: | Date Time | Test Num Iter Residue | FFT Error ms/It Time | ETA Done | | Mar 19 20:38:52 | M126745771 1000000 0x15edf96ca917718e | 6912K 0.25000 6.5481 327.40s | 9:12:49:49 0.78% | | Mar 20 03:56:31 | M126745771 5000000 0xb051d166bd0d4b77 | 6912K 0.26367 6.5451 327.25s | 9:05:54:55 3.94% | | Mar 20 13:03:25 | M126745771 10000000 0xc78694fe47a6c290 | 6912K 0.26563 6.6095 330.47s | 8:20:48:43 7.88% | | Mar 21 07:19:05 | M126745771 20000000 0xe8b99fde161b0dc9 | 6912K 0.25627 6.5234 326.17s | 8:02:45:13 15.77% | | Mar 22 01:36:06 | M126745771 30000000 0x8086b6a513e02681 | 6912K 0.26563 6.5931 329.65s | 7:08:36:49 23.66% | | Mar 22 19:54:40 | M126745771 40000000 0xdb678d3e24b74ed8 | 6912K 0.25000 6.5796 328.98s | 6:14:28:29 31.55% | | Mar 23 14:14:22 | M126745771 50000000 0x0487c8c933f3b472 | 6912K 0.26563 6.6038 330.19s | 5:20:17:48 39.44% | | Mar 24 08:31:55 | M126745771 60000000 0x602d363d22b19738 | 6912K 0.26563 6.5840 329.20s | 5:02:01:43 47.33% | | Mar 25 12:33:21 | M126745771 70000000 0xeb8cda315394d739 | 6912K 0.28125 6.5855 329.27s | 4:07:43:28 55.22% | | Mar 26 06:46:58 | M126745771 80000000 0x15755ff86e6e458a | 6912K 0.26563 6.5379 326.89s | 3:13:24:54 63.11% | | Mar 27 23:45:57 | M126745771 90000000 0x0754d138fd03932a | 6912K 0.25000 6.5502 327.51s | 2:19:07:16 71.00% | | Mar 28 17:57:45 | M126745771 100000000 0x9adb1773be482891 | 6912K 0.25781 6.5468 327.34s | 2:00:50:10 78.89% | | Mar 29 12:07:57 | M126745771 110000000 0xbcb72ec2eb415862 | 6912K 0.26563 6.5203 326.01s | 1:06:33:46 86.78% | | Mar 30 06:20:06 | M126745771 120000000 0x78dfe475a7ee035a | 6912K 0.26563 6.5534 327.67s | 12:18:32 94.67% | | Mar 30 15:25:57 | M126745771 125000000 0x128cef69ca9d362a | 6912K 0.26172 6.5461 327.30s | 3:11:06 98.62% | | Mar 30 17:15:07 | M126745771 126000000 0x88825c2169f7f431 | 6912K 0.26563 6.5485 327.42s | 1:21:38 99.41% | M( 126745771 )C, 0x86e0ae7fee07db__, 6912K, CUDALucas v2.06beta, estimated total time = 231:14:17 max error logged 0.29688 No separate error messages appear in the log file for this primality test. Last fiddled with by kriesel on 2020-03-31 at 17:41
2020-03-31, 17:42   #359
kriesel

"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest

108816 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Uncwilly This is not a commentary thread. If you want to add info to the quoted post, send me a pm with the specific changes or an new version of that post. Your post that I have quoted will be moved or wished away into the cornfield.

2020-04-01, 00:23   #360
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502

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

32·5·11·17 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by kriesel Hmm. See also posts 6 thru 8 by others.
7-8 are in context to a current is and will be moved after a sufficient time. If you gander at the processed thread, you will see many such things over there. It is closed and so all of the posts were here.

6 is important for those that may claim PRP-DC's. I have thought about extracting content and moving it to post 4.

2020-04-01, 00:54   #361
Runtime Error

Sep 2017
USA

12910 Posts

Hi, I can take this one. Running it with manual testing in mprime on linux, but I've registered it with Prime95 on windows.

Quote:
 Doublecheck=126745771,80,1
Edit: it says "mPrime95 please"... thought it was either mprime in linux or Prime95 on windows. Let me know if I should stop the test. Should be done in ~4 days

Last fiddled with by Runtime Error on 2020-04-01 at 01:43 Reason: what is mPrime95?

2020-04-01, 03:12   #362
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502

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

32×5×11×17 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Runtime Error Edit: it says "mPrime95 please"... thought it was either mprime in linux or Prime95 on windows. Let me know if I should stop the test. Should be done in ~4 days
Just my either/or shorthand. Your good. Note Ken's list above. You can see how your run is matching.

Last fiddled with by Uncwilly on 2020-04-01 at 03:13

2020-04-02, 16:06   #363
Runtime Error

Sep 2017
USA

3·43 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Uncwilly Note Ken's list above. You can see how your run is matching.
Noob question: How do I see these residuals? I'm running headless. Is there an option in mprime to write interim residuals to the results.txt or results.json.txt file?

Follow up: When manual testing, can we submit interim residuals to the server on the manual result turn in page somehow?

Thanks!

 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 07:07.

Tue Aug 11 07:07:27 UTC 2020 up 25 days, 2:54, 1 user, load averages: 2.38, 2.26, 2.27