![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
3·11·83 Posts |
![]()
I've chosen primality test task, but info shows P-1 factoring! Why ?
|
![]() |
#2 | |
Banned
"Luigi"
Aug 2002
Team Italia
3×1,619 Posts |
![]() Quote:
If you don't want it, there is a switch to avoid P-1 test. Luigi |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
6628 Posts |
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
#4 |
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA
22·3·641 Posts |
![]()
Although you can skip the P-1 factoring if you really want to, please consider letting it proceed.
The bounds for P-1 factoring are chosen to maximize GIMPS throughput. That is, on average a GIMPS participant will "clear" (prove to be composite) more exponents in a given time if the automatic P-1 step is allowed to precede the L-L test. It won't change your chances of finding a Mersenne prime. If P-1 finds a factor, then the L-L test would have found that the Mersenne number is composite but you will have saved yourself the time needed to run that L-L test and can proceed to your next number assignment sooner. Also, if you skip P-1 factoring before doing the L-L test, then later on someone else finds a factor by doing the P-1 step you skipped, you will lose GIMPS credit (on the GIMPS Top Producers list) for your L-L test, although your PrimeNet credits (on the PrimeNet Top Producers list) will remain unchanged. Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2004-02-23 at 16:51 |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Modifying the Lucas Lehmer Primality Test into a fast test of nothing | Trilo | Miscellaneous Math | 25 | 2018-03-11 23:20 |
LL first test shows 4 days to complete. | sr13798 | Information & Answers | 2 | 2016-11-14 16:30 |
Yet another new factoring algorithm\primality test:Digital Coding ?? | tServo | Miscellaneous Math | 3 | 2014-04-10 18:52 |
there is another way to test the primality of a no | shawn | Miscellaneous Math | 5 | 2007-07-17 17:55 |
A primality test for Fermat numbers faster than Pépin's test ? | T.Rex | Math | 0 | 2004-10-26 21:37 |