mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > Data

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2021-07-27, 14:55   #595
ZacHFX
 
ZacHFX's Avatar
 
Mar 2017
Halifax, NS

72 Posts
Default

While working through 12.2M, found two factors in the 69-70 range on 12243883. Not quite a unicorn, but what are the odds of this happening? Somewhere around 1/70/70?
ZacHFX is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-27, 15:03   #596
Viliam Furik
 
Viliam Furik's Avatar
 
"Viliam Furík"
Jul 2018
Martin, Slovakia

5·149 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZacHFX View Post
While working through 12.2M, found two factors in the 69-70 range on 12243883. Not quite a unicorn, but what are the odds of this happening? Somewhere around 1/70/70?
This happened to me maybe 10 times (maybe more) already. Probability, I'd say you are in the correct range with 1/4900.
Viliam Furik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-27, 18:38   #597
Viliam Furik
 
Viliam Furik's Avatar
 
"Viliam Furík"
Jul 2018
Martin, Slovakia

5×149 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viliam Furik View Post
This happened to me maybe 10 times (maybe more) already. Probability, I'd say you are in the correct range with 1/4900.
Even today... 10026343

Now that's a really improbable coincidence.
Viliam Furik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-28, 01:49   #598
tuckerkao
 
"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020
Head Base M168202123

12408 Posts
Default

So it's still possible to find 2 factors within the same bit of the same exponent. How about 3?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viliam Furik View Post
Even today... 10026343

Now that's a really improbable coincidence.
Since GPU72 recommended the TF up to 2^68, wondering why the user who ran the PRP-CF didn't check beforehand?

Glad I checked 2^67 to 2^68 of M11196881, so I had nearly no chance of missing 2 factors at once, but UncWilly still thought I made the mistake despite no additional factors were found by Team_Inspector afterwards.

Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 2021-07-28 at 02:05
tuckerkao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-28, 02:28   #599
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
"name field"
Jun 2011
Thailand

22×2,467 Posts
Default

Can we move few factors from the 11.8M to the 11.9M?

We already found 96 factors for 11.8M (94 needed) and there is about 28% more to go from the range (like about 20 or more factors expected). (James' site and Chris' "twok table" didn't catch up with it yet, but the range is done). We don't know if we should finish all the range just to satisfy personal OCD, or move to a new range and save the time. Advice?

Maybe split the GPUs and let one or two working in 11.8, and move the others to 11.4?

Anyhow, "twok" will catch up soon, and there will be only 203 ranges to go. Or 202, as I see the people working in 41M only need a factor or two to get rid of that range too.

Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2021-07-28 at 02:30
LaurV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-28, 02:53   #600
Viliam Furik
 
Viliam Furik's Avatar
 
"Viliam Furík"
Jul 2018
Martin, Slovakia

13518 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuckerkao View Post
So it's still possible to find 2 factors within the same bit of the same exponent. How about 3?
Sure, why not. Just let us know when you find one (or three, to be exact).

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuckerkao View Post
Since GPU72 recommended the TF up to 2^68, wondering why the user who ran the PRP-CF didn't check beforehand?
You do realize, that people doing PRP-CF do lots of them per day continuously, right? In order to do this, they would have to not only do PRP-CF, but also TF on them. That's more than double the work.

People usually (heck, almost never) pick a specific exponent (or type of exponent) to work on. Only you and few others do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuckerkao View Post
Glad I checked 2^67 to 2^68 of M11196881, so I had nearly no chance of missing 2 factors at once, but UncWilly still thought I made the mistake despite no additional factors were found by Team_Inspector afterwards.
This may be a bit of a shocker for you, but Uncwilly is Team_Inspector!

(I hope Uncwilly won't get mad at me for this...)

Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2021-07-28 at 04:31 Reason: fixed typo
Viliam Furik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-28, 03:12   #601
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

2×5×17×31 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurV View Post
move to a new range and save the time. Advice?
Move on. There is enough work in twok.
axn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-28, 03:18   #602
masser
 
masser's Avatar
 
Jul 2003
Behind BB

1,801 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurV View Post
We don't know if we should finish all the range just to satisfy personal OCD, or move to a new range and save the time. Advice?
Move on. Leave some low-hanging fruit for the searchers that follow after the twok project.
masser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-28, 03:36   #603
tuckerkao
 
"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020
Head Base M168202123

12408 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viliam Furik View Post
You do realize, that people doing PRP-CF do lots of them per day continuously, right? In order to do this, they would have to not only do PRP-CF, but also TF on them. That's more than double the work.

People usually (heck, almost never) pick a specific exponent (or type of exponent) to work on. Only you and few others do.

This may be a bit of a shocker for you, but Uncwilly is Team_Inpsector!

(I hope Uncwilly won't get mad at me for this...)
I indeed hand-picked M11196881 a while ago. I thought the only possible bit that could find at least 1 new factor was 2^67 to 2^68 for this particular number, so I only finished TF of that bit. At least Team_Inspector went in and I passed his inspection despite around an obvious 25% chance of failure.

Most of the PRP-CF only took 3 hours on my PC, so it wasn't a big deal even if a factor was missing.

Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 2021-07-28 at 04:04
tuckerkao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-28, 03:41   #604
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

2×5×17×31 Posts
Default

If TJAOI's results are to be trusted, there are no new factors < 2^67 to be found in GIMPS range (p < 1e9)
axn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-07-28, 03:45   #605
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
"name field"
Jun 2011
Thailand

100110100011002 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viliam Furik View Post
This may be a bit of a shocker for you, but Uncwilly is Team_Inpsector! (sic)
No way! I don't believe that
(and, yeah, he will get mad at you, but not for disclosure, for butchering the name, it sounds like an insect, kind of wasp? hihi )

(edit: "thinking out loud" about deleting the posts of tk which are not related, he doesn't contribute anything to this project, but doesn't miss an opportunity to brag bout his base twelve and intelligent selection method, methink we shouldn't give him the chance to spread the dirt in this thread too)

Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2021-07-28 at 03:54
LaurV is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Thinking of Joining GPU to 72 jschwar313 GPU to 72 3 2016-01-31 00:50
Thinking about lasieve5 Batalov Factoring 6 2011-12-27 22:40
Thinking about buying a panda jasong jasong 1 2008-11-11 09:43
Loud thinking on irregular primes devarajkandadai Math 4 2007-07-25 03:01
Question on unfactored numbers... WraithX GMP-ECM 1 2006-03-19 22:16

All times are UTC. The time now is 21:21.


Fri Jan 21 21:21:21 UTC 2022 up 182 days, 15:50, 0 users, load averages: 1.61, 1.53, 1.48

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, 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.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔