mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Prime Search Projects > Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2007-03-10, 18:54   #1
jasong
 
jasong's Avatar
 
"Jason Goatcher"
Mar 2005

3·7·167 Posts
Default Could something be wrong with Linux sr5sieve?

1315 factors found 5700-5750, expected 1440.

That's a pretty extreme difference, in my opinion. What do you guys think?
jasong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-10, 19:00   #2
masser
 
masser's Avatar
 
Jul 2003
wear a mask

1,571 Posts
Default

No, that's not too bad. I wouldn't be too worried.
masser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-10, 23:53   #3
geoff
 
geoff's Avatar
 
Mar 2003
New Zealand

13×89 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jasong View Post
1315 factors found 5700-5750, expected 1440.

That's a pretty extreme difference, in my opinion. What do you guys think?
Don't take the expected number of factors too seriously, the formula is not very accurate. It is calculated as N*(1-log(pmin)/log(pmax)) where N is the number of remaining terms, and pmin <= p <= pmax the range of factors tested.

Does anyone know a better estimate?

Last fiddled with by geoff on 2007-03-10 at 23:54 Reason: missing ')'
geoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-03-12, 03:13   #4
geoff
 
geoff's Avatar
 
Mar 2003
New Zealand

13·89 Posts
Default

I you are concerned that factors are being missed, there is a small test sieve sr5check.tar.gz at http://www.geocities.com/g_w_reynolds/sr5sieve/tests. There are instructions in the enclosed README, but briefly if you download sr5check.tar.gz and run `sr5sieve -i sr5check.txt -p 100e6 -P 150e6' it should find 10533 new factors, and the factors.txt file should match the checked-factors.txt file (which has been verified with NewPGen 2.82).

Another test in included in the sr5sieve source (see INSTALL): running `make realclean' then `make ARCH=k8 check' will test the modular arithmetic functions against GMP (for the -k8 build in this case). You need to have libgmp installed for this test.

Of course there are many corner cases that are not covered, but if both of these tests pass then that should give a reasonable assurance that most factors are being found in normal use.
geoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is Moore's Law wrong, or is it wrong-headed (6th time around) jasong jasong 12 2016-05-27 11:01
what I do wrong pepi37 Linux 4 2015-07-12 09:13
sr5sieve Benchmark thread axn Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5 25 2010-05-28 23:57
what wrong with this? graeme Lounge 22 2003-08-18 03:05
what wrong with this? Puzzles 0 1970-01-01 00:00

All times are UTC. The time now is 17:15.

Fri Apr 16 17:15:46 UTC 2021 up 8 days, 11:56, 0 users, load averages: 3.21, 3.36, 3.09

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.