mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > New To GIMPS? Start Here! > Information & Answers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2016-05-11, 06:37   #1
PawnProver44
 
PawnProver44's Avatar
 
"NOT A TROLL"
Mar 2016
California

110001012 Posts
Post Very (large) PRPs?

I was reading this list, when I found out it wasn't too hard to find all those PRPs. I looked at the end of the list, and found that "random" PRPs are discovered with 50,000 digits. What should I best use to find "random" PRPs say between 50k and 200k digits? Not that I would want to ever submit them on the PRPtop because the site simply does not accept "random" PRPs and there are no such PRPs there either. I would expect this to be done in about a week too, (200k digits almost), but correct me if that is not possible, please.
PawnProver44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2016-05-11, 06:53   #2
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
Jun 2011
Thailand

915410 Posts
Default

The "list" will accept "random" PRPs. Find one with more than 46k digits and send it there. Just find one.
LaurV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2016-05-11, 08:58   #3
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

3·5·17·19 Posts
Default

The submission page lists 20,000 digit as the minimum. But to actually enter Top 10000, it should be 42k+.

The submission page also says that
Quote:
please type one number by line using the following format :
number,its number of digits in base 10
and don't type their decimal expansion
So it is possible that if your number doesn't have a compact form, it might not be accepted.
axn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2016-05-11, 16:52   #4
PawnProver44
 
PawnProver44's Avatar
 
"NOT A TROLL"
Mar 2016
California

19710 Posts
Post

Can you find any examples of "random" PRPs on the site? I was looking for a specific program that I could input the large number in a .txt file (about 200,000 digits) and call nextprime(x) or previousprime(x), Pfgw is too slow is my guess?
PawnProver44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2016-05-11, 18:45   #5
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

59·157 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PawnProver44 View Post
...and call nextprime(x) or previousprime(x), Pfgw is too slow is my guess?
PRPtop is full of them as it is:
nextprime(10^x) (and next and next and next)
nextprime(12^x)
some other random example
Finding one is very easy, if that's your goal or if you find it fun thing to do. Most contributors there don't stop until they submit tens of thousands.
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2016-05-11, 23:17   #6
PawnProver44
 
PawnProver44's Avatar
 
"NOT A TROLL"
Mar 2016
California

197 Posts
Post

First, with what text editor can carry 200k+digits (need at least 400k digits) so I can input into pfgw (or some other program which can give me a direct result regardless the size for nextprime(x) = ?):

input.txt:
------------------------------------------
nextprime(597612129456797651389670218204770656.........(199,928 more digits).........107345799455301271768055018207593331)-597612129456797651389670218204770656.........(199,928 more digits).........107345799455301271768055018207593331
------------------------------------------

And get a result like this

-f -i input.txt

nextprime(x)-x is a 3-PRP!

-t -q input.txt

nextprime(597612129456797651389670218204770656.........(199,928 more digits).........107345799455301271768055018207593331)

is a Fermat and Lucus PRP!

I don't want to risk notepad, but someone who has tried that please let me know.

Pfgw output I do nextprime(x)-x, but when i input nextprime(x) it gives me:

nextprime(x) is a 3-PRP!

So I do not know what nextprime(x) is, but I can ignore that using nextprime(x)-x.

Last fiddled with by PawnProver44 on 2016-05-11 at 23:21
PawnProver44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2016-05-11, 23:26   #7
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

926310 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PawnProver44 View Post
So I do not know what nextprime(x) is, but I can ignore that.
Dude, I can tell you that nextprime(10^1000000000) is a billion-digit prime (even without calculating it; I can ignore that, too).

Where can I get my EFF money!??
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2016-05-12, 11:45   #8
alpertron
 
alpertron's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Buenos Aires, Argentina

32×149 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batalov View Post
Dude, I can tell you that nextprime(10^1000000000) is a billion-digit prime (even without calculating it; I can ignore that, too).

Where can I get my EFF money!??
prevprime(10^1000000000) is a billion-digit prime but nextprime(10^1000000000) is not.
alpertron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2016-05-12, 16:53   #9
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

100100001011112 Posts
Smile

Good point! I lost a "+" in the message: it is a billion+ digit number and qualifies for the EFF prize not!
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2016-05-12, 20:53   #10
PawnProver44
 
PawnProver44's Avatar
 
"NOT A TROLL"
Mar 2016
California

197 Posts
Post

Here are my running times with Wolfram | Alpha? (random 10, 20, 40, 80 digit numbers) Can anyone compare to Pfgw to see if it is faster?

nextprime(1615940397) = 1615940399 (1.2 s)

nextprime(14068924638939642180) = 14068924638939642181 (1.3 s)

nextprime(3718587170008038384873784221963098409550) = 3718587170008038384873784221963098409563 (1.3 s)

nextprime(97783010505674166402735696905325823805408510851148150244960782744188145048695585) = 97783010505674166402735696905325823805408510851148150244960782744188145048695591 (1.3 s)

I was expecting the time to be at lest 16 times as much for doubling the number of digits? Is this true for Pfgw? Thanks to anyone who can give approximate running times for Pfgw for (1,000; 2,000; 4,000; 8,000; digits PRPs please) as a larger version of my test.

Edit: I forgot to call nextprime(x) for random 80 digit number.

Last fiddled with by PawnProver44 on 2016-05-12 at 21:04
PawnProver44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2016-05-12, 21:05   #11
alpertron
 
alpertron's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Buenos Aires, Argentina

32×149 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PawnProver44 View Post
Here are my running times with Wolfram | Alpha? (random 10, 20, 40 digit numbers) Can anyone compare to Pfgw to see if it is faster?

nextprime(1615940397) = 1615940399 (1.2 s)

nextprime(14068924638939642180) = 14068924638939642181 (1.3 s)

nextprime(3718587170008038384873784221963098409550) = 3718587170008038384873784221963098409563 (1.3 s)

nextprime(97783010505674166402735696905325823805408510851148150244960782744188145048695585) = 97783010505674166402735696905325823805408510851148150244960782744188145048695591 (1.3 s)
From those timings, it is clear that the real time for nextprime is 0.0 s for all instances, and 1.2 s - 1.3 s is lost in the Web service. It can even include an artificial delay where no computation is done, so you cannot send too many requests to the server.

Last fiddled with by alpertron on 2016-05-12 at 21:07
alpertron is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Near- and quasi-repunit PRPs Batalov And now for something completely different 10 2019-09-12 13:31
OEIS - 2^n-5 - LLT-like algorithm for finding PRPs T.Rex Miscellaneous Math 13 2015-09-01 13:09
PRPs not prime schickel FactorDB 1 2015-08-03 02:50
Proven PRPs? Random Poster FactorDB 0 2012-07-24 10:53
PRPs that are composites gd_barnes Conjectures 'R Us 57 2011-09-12 12:31

All times are UTC. The time now is 12:46.

Sun Jan 24 12:46:44 UTC 2021 up 52 days, 8:58, 0 users, load averages: 2.75, 3.29, 3.12

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.