mersenneforum.org Does NewPGen have a bug?
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2018-10-26, 04:11 #1 chunsonnn   Oct 2018 1 Posts Does NewPGen have a bug? I was sieving k=173 from n=1M to n=2M, and I found this message by NewPGen: p=2215115304221 divides n=1798220. However 2,215,115,304,221 is composite (that number is 8627 * 256765423), so that message should not have popped up. Why didn't NewPGen remove n=1798220 when it was at p=8627 or at p=256765423? In case anyone's wondering, I was using NewPGen version 2.82 on a Pentium 4 computer. The problem also appears on another Pentium 4 machine, so I'm pretty sure it's not a hardware problem. Thank Cristiano
2018-10-26, 04:31   #2
axn

Jun 2003

22×11×107 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by chunsonnn I was sieving k=173 from n=1M to n=2M, and I found this message by NewPGen: p=2215115304221 divides n=1798220. However 2,215,115,304,221 is composite (that number is 8627 * 256765423), so that message should not have popped up. Why didn't NewPGen remove n=1798220 when it was at p=8627 or at p=256765423? In case anyone's wondering, I was using NewPGen version 2.82 on a Pentium 4 computer. The problem also appears on another Pentium 4 machine, so I'm pretty sure it's not a hardware problem. Thank Cristiano
p=2215115304211 divides 173*2^1798220-1

 2018-10-26, 06:28 #3 paulunderwood     Sep 2002 Database er0rr 7×491 Posts Isn't k=173 already sieved very deeply by PrimeGrid?
 2018-10-26, 12:01 #4 ATH Einyen     Dec 2003 Denmark 5×593 Posts Neither 8627 nor 256765423 is a factor of 173*2^1798220-1, so it must have been p=2215115304211 as axn pointed out.
2018-10-26, 12:08   #5
pinhodecarlos

"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK

2×5×11×43 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by paulunderwood Isn't k=173 already sieved very deeply by PrimeGrid?
Yes and tested up to n=2.04M by RPS.

 2018-10-26, 13:26 #6 rogue     "Mark" Apr 2003 Between here and the 24·7·53 Posts Why are you using newpgen for this form? Use srsieve/sr1sieve. They are much, much faster than newpgen for this form.
 2020-03-11, 12:13 #7 storm5510 Random Account     Aug 2009 U.S.A. 22·401 Posts Does NewPGen have a bug? Possibly. I noticed for any given range of n's, NewPGen will remove more n's, and at lower values of p, than the srXsieve family. Either NewPGen is removing n's it should not or srXsieve family is not removing n's it should. A combination of both is also possible. I have no way to determine which case it may be.
2020-03-11, 16:54   #8
VBCurtis

"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

24×3×7×13 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by storm5510 Does NewPGen have a bug? Possibly. I noticed for any given range of n's, NewPGen will remove more n's, and at lower values of p, than the srXsieve family. Either NewPGen is removing n's it should not or srXsieve family is not removing n's it should. A combination of both is also possible. I have no way to determine which case it may be.
Please elaborate, with example files. The OP's post is surely a typo, while yours is a serious allegation.

2020-03-15, 13:46   #9
storm5510
Random Account

Aug 2009
U.S.A.

22×401 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by VBCurtis Please elaborate, with example files. The OP's post is surely a typo, while yours is a serious allegation.
"Serious allegation." I do not consider it as being such. I am not condemning either. Just a simple comparison.

I can provide example files. It may take a couple of days. I am running a wide-range sieve on my HP to 1.5-trillion. I can replicate this with NewPGen on my laptop. My i7 is running a double-instance of LLR so I cannot use it.

Edit: I will allow the srXsieve on the HP to finish, and then run the NewPGen test after it. sr1sieve estimates completion on March 17 at around 19:00 UTC.

Last fiddled with by storm5510 on 2020-03-15 at 14:04 Reason: Append

2020-03-15, 17:18   #10
pepi37

Dec 2011
After milion nines:)

101010000112 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by storm5510 "Serious allegation." I do not consider it as being such. I am not condemning either. Just a simple comparison. I can provide example files. It may take a couple of days. I am running a wide-range sieve on my HP to 1.5-trillion. I can replicate this with NewPGen on my laptop. My i7 is running a double-instance of LLR so I cannot use it. Edit: I will allow the srXsieve on the HP to finish, and then run the NewPGen test after it. sr1sieve estimates completion on March 17 at around 19:00 UTC.

Why is needed to wait so many days: take sequence you know produce "problems" runn it on NewPgen few minutes, and run it under srxsieve few minutes ( to reach same depth)
So all work can be done in 10 minutes.
Or tell us what sequence have problem and I would like to comparison for you,
For that you can only need seconds to write reply on my post

2020-03-17, 01:51   #11
storm5510
Random Account

Aug 2009
U.S.A.

110010001002 Posts

I scaled this test down dramatically. The parameters are:

Series: 7*2^n-1
n: 350,000
N: 650,000
p: (default)
P: 50e9

It took srsieve/sr1sieve about 30 minutes to run this. NewPGen, over four hours. NewPGen does not start storing factors until it p passes 2^32. So, I set the ceiling for srsieve to this value. The staring p for sr1sieve was the same.

During the sieve NewPGen pulled out 5,603 factors, sr1sieve pulled out 840.
Yet, the compete files for LLR were exactly the same. 7,092 elements each. Some may be familiar with fc, short for file compare. I compared both LLR files. The only difference was in the header line at the very top.

All the files are stored in the attached zip file. There is also an image attachment with NewPGen set into a PowerShell window where I ran srsieve and sr1sieve.

Q: How is it possible for NewPGen to flag so many more factors than sr1sieve and both results files be virtually identical?
Attached Thumbnails

Attached Files
 sieve.zip (90.9 KB, 47 views)

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Cybertronic Factoring 0 2014-03-22 10:07 MooooMoo Riesel Prime Search 16 2008-12-11 11:46 roger Information & Answers 0 2007-04-04 22:38 Cruelty Riesel Prime Search 3 2006-02-15 05:15 Zenmastur Software 4 2003-08-02 19:43

All times are UTC. The time now is 00:07.

Wed Oct 21 00:07:40 UTC 2020 up 40 days, 21:18, 0 users, load averages: 2.36, 2.06, 1.97