20210929, 17:37  #771 
If I May
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados
10181_{10} Posts 

20210929, 17:40  #772 
"Yves"
Jul 2017
Belgium
3^{4} Posts 

20210930, 08:35  #773  
"Oliver"
Sep 2017
Porta Westfalica, DE
830_{10} Posts 
Quote:
For 26.3M, I guess you'll have to strike me out because Chris is finishing it up. @Chris: Thanks for releasing the other two ranges for me. 

20210930, 17:25  #774  
Jul 2003
Behind BB
707_{16} Posts 
Quote:
The formula I use is: Actual Probability = (Pr(new)Pr(old)) / (1Pr(old)) 

20210930, 19:24  #775  
If I May
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados
10,181 Posts 
Quote:
I have found that the probabilities given by way of James' specialized Worktodo generator give quite different probabilities, compared to mprime during runtime calculations, compared to James' deep drilldown iif a factor is found. I'm mostly just wondering if anyone else sees this, or if I'm not understanding things deeply enough (very high probability of the latter). P.S. BTW, we seriously overshot 13.7M. Sorry about that. P1 was more successful than expected. 

20210930, 19:49  #776  
Jul 2003
Behind BB
707_{16} Posts 
Quote:
1. mprime is most correct; its calculator is getting attention with recent updates to the P1/ECM/P+1 algorithms and comparisons to gpuOwl. 2. James' exponent pages (the deep drill downs) report values fairly close to the mprime probabilities 3. Something weird happens with the "worst bounds" page. It's not quite as dynamic as we might like; exponents can only be removed (when someone does an improved P1). Perhaps it should be possible for exponents to join the list when the P1 bounds become "small" relative to the amount of TF that's been done. 

20211001, 00:40  #777  
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada
5·997 Posts 
Quote:
All I use is: Actual Probability = Pr(new)Pr(old). If the prior P1 had a 2% prob and the new P1 has a 5% prob then isn't the new P1 actaully expected to have a net 3% success rate?? 

20211001, 00:45  #778  
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada
4985_{10} Posts 
Quote:
As in my formula above: Actual Probability = Pr(new)Pr(old). My overall average success rate is about 0.25% higher than this. Though it does seem to be a little closer with the new version of P1 (which I assume includes new estimations). Of course I have really bad ranges and also really good ones (like your 13.7)....but overall.... 

20211001, 00:51  #779  
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada
5·997 Posts 
Quote:
See my formula in response to masser's response above. I'm waiting for him to tell my if I'm mathematically confused. :( 

20211001, 00:59  #780 
Jul 2003
Behind BB
7·257 Posts 
RDS once reminded me about conditional probabilities.
When P1 is relatively small, P2P1 is a good enough approximation. 
20211001, 01:06  #781  
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada
5×997 Posts 
Quote:


Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Thinking of Joining GPU to 72  jschwar313  GPU to 72  3  20160131 00:50 
Thinking about lasieve5  Batalov  Factoring  6  20111227 22:40 
Thinking about buying a panda  jasong  jasong  1  20081111 09:43 
Loud thinking on irregular primes  devarajkandadai  Math  4  20070725 03:01 
Question on unfactored numbers...  WraithX  GMPECM  1  20060319 22:16 