mersenneforum.org  

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2021-11-01, 20:19   #12
Madpoo
Serpentine Vermin Jar
 
Madpoo's Avatar
 
Jul 2014

5×677 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viliam Furik View Post
But the bad residues are not matching. In the above post, I was describing the probability of two bad residues randomly matching.
There are some truly bizarre example cases out there... exponents that had a LOT of bad runs. Some like this, I'm guessing the user was testing the same exponent on multiple machines or something? Many of which were bad. Or it was one of those odd cases where the machine wasn't clearing the worktodo so it just kept doing the same exponent repeatedly. Either way... chatmate sure kept at it:
M2397103

Then this one... EDNY just couldn't get a matching one no matter how hard they tried:
M16073131

Things like this too... and one of the reasons I like to do independent verification of results. Who's to say the user kept trying to get a match to their first one and finally gave up and forged a "match"? (they didn't, but still...)
M23057101

Now come the odd ones... multiple bad results that have matching residues. Yes, it's extremely improbable, and how would you catch it if it happened? Well, that's why we also require different shift counts, because sometimes users submit the same result multiple times (and from different accounts). It's accidental almost all the time... user found an old results file and wasn't sure it was submitted, so they manually resubmit but didn't logon to their account, or whatever else.

M17650979

Now for the really weird ones:
M4589707
M39988591
M42525269 (well, this user had a known issue on these last 3)
M43714607
M45111893

Those first 2 are definitely a surprise. In the case of M4589707 there was already one different res64 from a different user, but then those 2 "matching" from Klaus with different shift counts? Pretty sketchy.

The 2nd one, M39988591, justified my whole thing about making sure all verifications are done by independent people... the same person shouldn't be allowed to turn in their own self check. Why? Well, it's why we mask the last hexits of the residue, to prevent cheating. Someone would have to turn in as much as 256 guesses before getting a match (well, on average more like 128) and we'd spot that super easy. Even one wrong "guess" where only the last couple hexits of a residue changed would be a dead giveaway. But the user who did the first one would know it and can fake a result with a different shift count, and there you go.

Now... I'm not saying Klaus or Kali cheated, but you tell me... how else would that happen? Same partial residue, same user, supposedly different shift counts so it wasn't a case of submitting the same result twice... yeah, no other way I can think of besides forging it.

What's to stop someone from creating multiple accounts and cheating that way, by submitting them from different accounts so they're harder to spot? Yeah... it's a problem. As computers get faster though, we'll spot check previous results and eventually we may catch others.

As it is, I've personally done my own test on all exponents below 4M or 5M or whatever, just because it was trivial at the time. Imagine that someday maybe it'll be trivial to do the same up to 30M, 40M, or more. Eventually get through all of the LL tests, leaving us with the (harder to forge?) PRP + cert results.
Madpoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-11-02, 00:13   #13
ixfd64
Bemusing Prompter
 
ixfd64's Avatar
 
"Danny"
Dec 2002
California

2·29·43 Posts
Default

Off-topic, but glad to see you here again, Aaron. I was wondering where you went.
ixfd64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-11-02, 00:59   #14
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

2A8B16 Posts
Default

I have seen him around behind the scenes picking up some TC and QC exponents. No vacation in Club Fed.
Uncwilly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-11-02, 02:35   #15
tuckerkao
 
"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020
Head Base M168202123

88010 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Madpoo View Post
M42525269 (well, this user had a known issue on these last 3)
M43714607
M45111893
You cannot have a good C-LL with the residue of all 0's. Best to run the PRP tests on those exponents. A true P-LL requires the P-PRP result and the successful certification.

Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 2021-11-02 at 02:40
tuckerkao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-11-02, 02:41   #16
slandrum
 
Jan 2021
California

11·47 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuckerkao View Post
You cannot have a good C-LL with the residue of all 0's. Best to run the PRP tests on those exponents. A true P-LL requires the P-PRP results.
How many Mersenne primes have you found with LL?
slandrum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-11-02, 02:46   #17
tuckerkao
 
"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020
Head Base M168202123

24·5·11 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by slandrum View Post
How many Mersenne primes have you found with LL?
I ran both the PRP and LL for M1257787 once to make sure my machine performed correctly, but I haven't tried on other exponents that are larger than 1M.

I ran 1 LL test on M103374163 a long time ago, but no one has tried to double check it anyway.

Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 2021-11-02 at 02:57
tuckerkao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-11-02, 16:21   #18
kriesel
 
kriesel's Avatar
 
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest

163048 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by slandrum View Post
How many Mersenne primes have you found with LL?
No mersenne prime has yet been found by PRP first then LL confirmation.
Since PRP began around 77.5M, only one known might have been found by PRP, but was found by LL first.
https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...exp_hi=&full=1
Hundreds of false positive 0 res64 have been reported for LL, mostly by CUDALucas <v2.06.
https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...40&postcount=4
kriesel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-12-21, 06:04   #19
tuckerkao
 
"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020
Head Base M168202123

24×5×11 Posts
Default

ATH is working on the Double Checks of LL tests with no first time LL results - M106314457 and M106316611.

Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 2021-12-21 at 06:09
tuckerkao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-12-21, 07:19   #20
Zhangrc
 
"University student"
May 2021
Beijing, China

10C16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuckerkao View Post
ATH is working on the Double Checks of LL tests with no first time LL results - M106314457 and M106316611.
More likely they are PRP proofs. The first time LLs seem to take months to finish.
Zhangrc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-12-21, 07:21   #21
tuckerkao
 
"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020
Head Base M168202123

24×5×11 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhangrc View Post
More likely they are PRP proofs. The first time LLs seem to take months to finish.
There are no finished PRP tests for those 2 exponents either.
tuckerkao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-12-21, 09:22   #22
ATH
Einyen
 
ATH's Avatar
 
Dec 2003
Denmark

2×17×101 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuckerkao View Post
ATH is working on the Double Checks of LL tests with no first time LL results - M106314457 and M106316611.
I grabbed them as they expired and they were already registered as LL not PRP, so I had to use LL to get them, but I will do a PRP proof on them instead.
ATH is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Double checking gd_barnes Riesel Prime Search 71 2022-10-02 17:21
Double-checking PRP preda Math 13 2018-09-24 19:37
Attempts vs. Successes oddity Rodrigo GPU Computing 8 2014-09-19 08:44
Double checking Unregistered Information & Answers 19 2011-07-29 09:57
LL-D attempts and successes Christenson Information & Answers 1 2011-02-03 05:25

All times are UTC. The time now is 12:29.


Mon Jan 30 12:29:57 UTC 2023 up 165 days, 9:58, 0 users, load averages: 1.16, 1.03, 0.97

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, 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 𝛴𝜎𝜍 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔