"Exponents with less TF than expected"

Rodrigo · 2013-02-21, 05:12

A couple of questions (all right, three) about this page that I just came across:

If these exponents are "underfactored," then why hasn't anyone taken them up yet? The bulk of TF work seems to be getting done way past their range.
I checked a couple of dozen of these exponents on the Manual Assignments page, and they look available as no one is listed as having them. The only one that I checked that has been assigned is the first one on the list, and that one appears to have been languishing for over a year. Yet, I can't seem to find a way to get PrimeNet to assign them to me. Every attempt (filling in the range of exponents in the "Optional exponent range" fields) has come back with an "Error 40." On the other hand, the page firmly requests not to poach. But if I can't get the server to assign them to me, then how can I or someone else be sure that we won't be stepping on each other's toes?
In view of #2, how does one go about getting these exponents assigned to oneself, or does one simply DO them and take the chance that somebody else is doing them at the same time? (Not that this is very likely, given that they've been waiting for up to three years.)

Apologies if this question has been dealt with already, but searches using the terms "underfactored" or the name of the mersenne.ca link (as in this thread's title) didn't turn up anything.

Thanks in advance for any info, suggestions, or advice. Maybe I'm simply doing something wrong...

Rodrigo

LaurV · 2013-02-21, 08:07

That is where the "front" is! Those are all over 65M, TF-ed to 69 instead of 70. They were not "reached" yet by the CPU factoring, when GPU72 was born, and even now, CPU is factoring from 65 to 66 bits, for which this range is done long ago. Factoring them to 73 or so, this is what GPU72 will do in the immediately next weeks. Keep close to GPU72 and you will get them as assignments immediately after 64M is finished

Rodrigo · 2013-02-21, 16:28

Thanks, LaurV.

Would there be any objection if I just picked them up now and did them? I was thinking of factoring them up to 71.

Rodrigo

chalsall · 2013-02-21, 16:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rodrigo

Would there be any objection if I just picked them up now and did them? I was thinking of factoring them up to 71.

Not at all. Although 70->71 work in 62M, 63M and 64M would be of more value for GIMPS as a whole.

But, as always, this is a volunteer effort -- everyone is encouraging to do whatever work they enjoy the most. GPU72 won't be able to get to 65M for two to three months.

Rodrigo · 2013-02-21, 17:13

Thank you, chalsall.

I'll start putting 'em on my Pentium 233 -- errr, Radeon HD 7700

-- and then at the end explore joining GPU72.

Rodrigo

2013-02-21, 05:12	#1
Rodrigo Jun 2010 Pennsylvania 2×467 Posts	"Exponents with less TF than expected" A couple of questions (all right, three) about this page that I just came across: If these exponents are "underfactored," then why hasn't anyone taken them up yet? The bulk of TF work seems to be getting done way past their range. I checked a couple of dozen of these exponents on the Manual Assignments page, and they look available as no one is listed as having them. The only one that I checked that has been assigned is the first one on the list, and that one appears to have been languishing for over a year. Yet, I can't seem to find a way to get PrimeNet to assign them to me. Every attempt (filling in the range of exponents in the "Optional exponent range" fields) has come back with an "Error 40." On the other hand, the page firmly requests not to poach. But if I can't get the server to assign them to me, then how can I or someone else be sure that we won't be stepping on each other's toes? In view of #2, how does one go about getting these exponents assigned to oneself, or does one simply DO them and take the chance that somebody else is doing them at the same time? (Not that this is very likely, given that they've been waiting for up to three years.) Apologies if this question has been dealt with already, but searches using the terms "underfactored" or the name of the mersenne.ca link (as in this thread's title) didn't turn up anything. Thanks in advance for any info, suggestions, or advice. Maybe I'm simply doing something wrong... Rodrigo

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Aouessare-El Haddouchi-Essaaidi "test": "if Mp has no factor, it is prime!"	wildrabbitt	Miscellaneous Math	11	2015-03-06 08:17
re-doing "poorly P-1 factored" exponents	ixfd64	PrimeNet	9	2013-01-07 19:51
The Official "Lost Exponents???" Thread	Unregistered	PrimeNet	1	2005-03-15 07:15
Would Minimizing "iterations between results file" may reveal "is not prime" earlier?	nitai1999	Software	7	2004-08-26 18:12
Exponents to re-release for first-time testing: "harmful" errorcodes	GP2	Data	4	2003-10-18 22:08

2013-02-21, 08:07	#2
LaurV Romulan Interpreter Jun 2011 Thailand 11·23·37 Posts	That is where the "front" is! Those are all over 65M, TF-ed to 69 instead of 70. They were not "reached" yet by the CPU factoring, when GPU72 was born, and even now, CPU is factoring from 65 to 66 bits, for which this range is done long ago. Factoring them to 73 or so, this is what GPU72 will do in the immediately next weeks. Keep close to GPU72 and you will get them as assignments immediately after 64M is finished Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2013-02-21 at 08:12

2013-02-21, 16:28	#3
Rodrigo Jun 2010 Pennsylvania 2×467 Posts	Thanks, LaurV. Would there be any objection if I just picked them up now and did them? I was thinking of factoring them up to 71. Rodrigo

2013-02-21, 17:13	#5
Rodrigo Jun 2010 Pennsylvania 2·467 Posts	Thank you, chalsall. I'll start putting 'em on my Pentium 233 -- errr, Radeon HD 7700 -- and then at the end explore joining GPU72. Rodrigo