20031222, 14:22  #1  
Sep 2002
Vienna, Austria
3×73 Posts 
Riesel Primes k*2^n1, k<300 [Was "k=1"]
<Edit>Links and info posted by Kosmaj on May 12, 2004. Updated Jan 23, 2007.
Quote:
Orginal post by wpolly: Have anyone considered about the most "basic" of the 15k's  15? I'm thinking about 15*2^n1 primes (or other low k such as 75 165 225). Those 15k's only completed to 10000 according to 15k stats page. Anyone interested? Last fiddled with by Kosmaj on 20070123 at 19:52 

20031222, 17:41  #2 
Sep 2002
2×131 Posts 
Thanks for the link wpolly.
I'll update the stats with the new stuff. k=15 is not a prone prime sequence. but if you wish, the stats would be helpfull. Joss L15. 
20040325, 19:36  #3 
Jun 2003
Oxford, UK
2^{2}·3·7·23 Posts 
k=1
Since the new LLR is 400% faster then looking at this series (15*2^n1) makes an awful lot of sense. In fact I started my main machine sieving to 1 million immediately. After a week the sieve should be nice and lean. The reason for picking this low is because the speed up will work on SSE2 apparently.
I looked at this series as part of my primoproth search but gave up because it was so unprime up to n=100000, but if you are looking for big primes.... Robert Smith 
20040326, 01:42  #4 
Sep 2002
2×131 Posts 
Hi Robert,
I'm already working on it up to 150k for the complete sequence. So it's all yours from that point. Joss 
20040327, 09:06  #5 
Jun 2003
Oxford, UK
2^{2}×3×7×23 Posts 
n=1
Joss
Thank you for telling me this, saves half a day! The sieve is reducing my candidates still at an alarming rate, and there will be very few candidates left to use this blindingly fast software on! Forecast between 100000 and 200000 ... 6, 200000..1000000 6 more. This is gut feel, no maths involved. Regards Robert Smith 
20040328, 09:50  #6 
Sep 2002
2×131 Posts 
Robert
I'm all done to 150k. It might be interesting to team test this one. How far are you at sieving? Joss 
20040330, 19:12  #7 
Jun 2003
Oxford, UK
2^{2}·3·7·23 Posts 
1
Joss
I had to go away for a few days, and I started testing the number. I found two between 150 and 212K. How many did you find between 100 and 150K? I would guess 4. Disappointingly the LLR and the NewPgen sieve seem to compete for computer time in an inefficient manner. So the sieve is not as far advanced as I had hoped, only at 32 bn so far. But of course, now I am testing the numbers! So I have stopped that, and will concentrate on sieving from 212000 to 1 million, until I only get one candidate sieved in approximately 4 minutes. I think there are not enough people doing 15K to divert them from other tasks right now, especially as the other small numbers are begging to be worked on. But I am willing to share the sieve results if people are interested. I can't be expected to do much for this group, as I am horribly busy in the real world at the moment. So someone else will have to organise it. Regards Robert Smith 
20040331, 08:08  #8 
Nov 2003
7046_{8} Posts 
Hello Robert,
Congrats to you and Slash Dude on your new primes! Can somobody post exe times/cpu info of the new LLR for various exponents around n=200,000. Some exe times are given in the 321 forum but for much higher exponents and without cpu info, so they are not so useful. Have been thinking to try one small k myself but don't know which one... 
20040331, 18:12  #9  
Feb 2003
3564_{8} Posts 
Quote:
For k=5 or k=7 my AthlonXP 2400+ (2 GHz) takes about 2 minutes for a test around n=200000. But I've found that only for the smallest values of k (e.g. 5, 7, 9 and may be 11) LLR behaves like for k=3. For somewhat larger k it seems that the new LLR switches much earlier to larger FFTlengths, e.g. testing k=29 for a given n takes almost twice the time as testing the same n for k=3. Last year I talked with Paul Underwood about extending the 321search project to k=5 and k=7, and I have already sieved k=5 and k=7 for n=1915001000000 up to about p=300 billion. This is far from being complete, but at the moment I don't have the time and computer power to continue this work. So, I could send you the sieve files, if you're interested. Just one last note: Please inform Wilfried Keller http://www.prothsearch.net/riesel2.html about any ranges you have tested and the primes you have found (if any), to keep his list of primes for k<300 current and to avoid others from double and tripple testing empty ranges. It seems to me that quite a lot of k's have already been tested up to about n=400000 or 500000 by some Proth.exe users but without giving Wilfried Keller the information about the ranges they did.  Thomas. 

20040331, 18:46  #10  
Banned
"Luigi"
Aug 2002
Team Italia
1001011001011_{2} Posts 
Quote:
Luigi Last fiddled with by ET_ on 20040331 at 18:46 

20040331, 20:57  #11 
Jul 2003
2×3×19 Posts 
If it has not already been done or started I am preparing to sieve k=9 from 1915001000000. or would it be better to continue the sieving of 5 and 7?
Last fiddled with by SB2 on 20040331 at 21:03 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Is CEMPLLA 1.5 "the only software in the world capable of discovering" something? Not really.  CRGreathouse  Number Theory Discussion Group  51  20181216 21:55 
Something something something... (obviously nor "Riesel Primes")  URoy  Miscellaneous Math  15  20161117 22:52 
Palindrome primes (a.k.a. Elementary S03E03 "Just a Regular Irregular")  Batalov  And now for something completely different  12  20141116 19:03 
Welcome to "Riesel Prime Search"  Kosmaj  Riesel Prime Search  21  20120914 09:51 
Would Minimizing "iterations between results file" may reveal "is not prime" earlier?  nitai1999  Software  7  20040826 18:12 