20081025, 19:09  #133 
Jan 2005
479 Posts 

20081025, 19:30  #134  
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT5)
79^{2} Posts 
Quote:
Since this is only for a relatively small chunk of nrange, and since your machine is known to be stable, no need to redo these ranges. However, if you could please run Phrot with the b=3 option on the command line in the future, that would be great. Edit: It appears that this also holds true for your Phrotproduced Riesel base 3 results. Again, no need to redo them, but you'll definitely want to watch this in the future. Last fiddled with by mdettweiler on 20081025 at 19:31 

20081025, 19:44  #135 
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
31·67 Posts 
Okay.
I had no idea what the numbers meant in results.out! I thought the numbers in the brackets was some sort of residue that could be doublechecked. Also, from this post: http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpos...1&postcount=79 I assumed that the LLR residues were invalid anway? Is that what the *_e executables are for? I'll add the b=3 option for future ranges. 
20081025, 20:23  #136  
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT5)
14141_{8} Posts 
Quote:
As for the validity of the LLR residuals produced by Phrot: no, it seems that that's just an isolated (albeit quite mysterious) circumstance. Most residuals produced by Phrot should exactly match their LLR counterpartsI've confirmed it myself a number of times. As for the *_e executables: those have some extra error checking functionality enabled, which might help reduce the chance of an invalid LLR residual in those rare cases where one might pop up. Since I haven't heard of any recorded performance drops from using the errorchecking version, you may as well use it instead of the "normal" version. (It simply adds an extra section to each results file line, enclosed in parentheses, detailing various errorchecking information, though it all seems Greek to me. ) 

20081026, 02:40  #138  
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT5)
6241_{10} Posts 
Quote:
However, from what I can tell, the residual errors are very infrequent and happen mostly on powerof2 bases (for which it's usually more advisable to use LLR anyway). So, considering the apparent speed difference, you may as well use the regular version after all. 

20081026, 02:52  #139  
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT5)
79^{2} Posts 
Quote:
Okay, it looks like the "regular" version is probably the way to go for most purposes. 

20081026, 02:54  #140  
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
31×67 Posts 
Quote:
The lost time was more than made up for by this: 26261252*3^91020+1 is prime. 

20081026, 08:16  #141 
May 2007
Kansas; USA
10241_{10} Posts 
The last 2 k's with primes have now been removed from all files. 80 k's remain.
Chris, if you click on the 3 links in your reservation posts here, you can get files with the k's removed for n=90K93K. 
20081026, 18:56  #142 
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
4035_{8} Posts 
28071866*3^91455+1
48652642*3^92392+1 Are prime. 
20081026, 22:58  #143 
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
100000011101_{2} Posts 
30440162*3^90938+1 is prime.

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Sierp base 16  team drive #1  gd_barnes  Conjectures 'R Us  254  20140610 16:00 
Sierp base 3  minidrive II  gd_barnes  Conjectures 'R Us  46  20091026 18:19 
Riesel base 3  minidrive I  gd_barnes  Conjectures 'R Us  199  20090930 18:44 
Sierp base 3  minidrive Ib  gd_barnes  Conjectures 'R Us  43  20090306 08:41 
minidrive for highn testing on Sierp base 4  gd_barnes  Conjectures 'R Us  43  20080716 10:12 