I don't get the 'http://mersenne.org/primenet/'

[joblack]

I don't get the 'http://mersenne.org/primenet/' results completely.

Can you simplify the output (usability) or make a legend which explains what is what? Also I think you have some redundancy in the output ...

[axn]

Right at the bottom of the page:

Legend for first 8 columns: P = Prime, F = At least one known factor, LL-D = Double-checked LL,
LL = One Lucas-Lehmer test, LLERR = One Lucas-Lehmer test with possible hardware errors,
NO-LL = No Lucas-Lehmer test run

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by joblack

I don't get the 'http://mersenne.org/primenet/' results completely.

Can you simplify the output (usability) or make a legend which explains what is what?

Which specific items do you think need simplifying or further explanation?

Also I think you have some redundancy in the output ...

Where, specifically?

[lfm]

Originally Posted by joblack

I don't get the 'http://mersenne.org/primenet/' results completely.

Can you simplify the output (usability) or make a legend which explains what is what? Also I think you have some redundancy in the output ...

One key is the vertical lines are significant separators of groups of figures.

[joblack]

Originally Posted by cheesehead

Which specific items do you think need simplifying or further explanation?

Where, specifically?

For instance, why are there none Status Unproven LL in the higher exponents. Why don't they show all Unproven LLs (they are free). The same is with Available LL ... the higher exponents are all available but aren't shown.

IMHO it's too complicated and too much information shown in the wrong way.

How about something like

Exponent Start Range_count P Composite Assigned Availabe (or left) ...

[cheesehead]

I'm wondering whether your browser is properly displaying the fixed-width font used for the table under the "Exponent Status Distribution" heading. If not, then all the alignments that are readily apparent to the rest of us might not be so apparent to you. Is that table displayed in a fixed-width font, or in a variable-width font, for you?

Check your browser settings for font displays. Do you have a default fixed-width font assigned? Do you have a setting that allows the font specified in the page's HTML to override your default?

Originally Posted by joblack

For instance, why are there none Status Unproven LL in the higher exponents.

Note that "Status Unproven" has three subdivisions: "LL", "LLERR", and "NO-LL". What I see is that most higher exponents are entirely in the "NO-LL" subdivision.

For instance, on the 999000000 line I see 23328 status-unproven exponents, all of them in the "NO-LL" subdivision. As a cross-check, I see that the number proven composite because they've been factored ("F") is 24629, and 24629+23328 = 47957 which is the total count in that range.

Why don't they show all Unproven LLs (they are free).

On the 999000000 line, all of the 47957 exponents in that range are accounted-for in either the "Composite"-"F"(factored) subdivision, or the "Status Unproven"-"NO-LL" subdivision, so all are accounted-for ... but do you see them properly aligned with the headings as I do?

The same is with Available LL ... the higher exponents are all available but aren't shown.

What I see is that all of the status-unproven _are_ available for the higher exponents, mostly in the TF subdivision of "Available".

(999000000 is an exception because it has 2683 currently assigned for TF, so only 20645 of the 23328 status-unproven exponents in this range are still "available". 20645 available + 2683 assigned = 23328 status-unproven, so all are accounted-for.)

How about something like

Exponent Start Range_count P Composite Assigned Availabe (or left) ...

Leaving out the "Status Unproven" category, which are the ones not yet definitely known to be composite or prime?

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by cheesehead

I'm wondering whether your browser is properly displaying the fixed-width font used for the table under the "Exponent Status Distribution" heading. If not, then all the alignments that are readily apparent to the rest of us might not be so apparent to you. Is that table displayed in a fixed-width font, or in a variable-width font, for you?

Does it look like this?
If not try copying it to notepad.

[cheesehead]

(* sigh *) Will I ever catch up to the video/graphic generation, or be forever stuck in the '60s? (* sigh *) I really must hang out with my nephew more often.

[lfm]

Originally Posted by joblack

For instance, why are there none Status Unproven LL in the higher exponents. Why don't they show all Unproven LLs (they are free).

When I see it, all the high ones ARE in the "status unproven/no-LL" group.

The same is with Available LL ... the higher exponents are all available but aren't shown.

They aren't counted as available for LL tests till they have been thru the trial factoring tests.

IMHO it's too complicated and too much information shown in the wrong way.

How about something like

Exponent Start Range_count P Composite Assigned Availabe (or left) ...

maybe ... maybe not. It IS complicated at first. It takes a while to get it straight. All the info there IS useful to someone.

[joblack]

Originally Posted by cheesehead

(* sigh *) Will I ever catch up to the video/graphic generation, or be forever stuck in the '60s? (* sigh *) I really must hang out with my nephew more often.

I like text (and command line) displays as well but if you need a lot of time to get hold of what's meant there is room for improvement. It's not that 'usable' in a usability point of view.

Perhaps the problem is that the guys who are programming the website are so into their field that they can't imagine that somebody doesn't find the output very informative (-I'm always astounished somebody thinks I'm doing magic on the command line-).

Another suggestion: How about including a simplified output for people who just want to know (can still be in text output):

- how many numbers are free
- how many numbers already taken
...

Some kind of 'prime essentials' output ^^

[davieddy]

I have to say that the display of stats at the top of the page
is a masterpiece of obfuscation.

If I could work out what the designer was trying to convey,
I would gladly suggest how to display it more transparently.

David