mersenneforum.org  

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2012-07-13, 04:34   #1387
Jwb52z
 
Jwb52z's Avatar
 
Sep 2002

22×197 Posts
Default

Thank you. I'll try to remember from now on so I won't do that again.
Jwb52z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-07-25, 00:51   #1388
bcp19
 
bcp19's Avatar
 
Oct 2011

7·97 Posts
Default

Found a nice 102 bit factor: http://mersenne-aries.sili.net/expon...etails=8491921, was just missed by the old P-1
bcp19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-07-25, 01:50   #1389
kladner
 
kladner's Avatar
 
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!

2·3·1,693 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jwb52z View Post
Thank you. I'll try to remember from now on so I won't do that again.
Speaking only for myself, such reports are interesting wherever they turn up.
kladner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-16, 11:58   #1390
bcp19
 
bcp19's Avatar
 
Oct 2011

7·97 Posts
Default

Found another B-S factor http://mersenne-aries.sili.net/expon...etails=8499577
bcp19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-17, 13:03   #1391
MrHappy
 
MrHappy's Avatar
 
Dec 2003
Paisley Park & Neverland

5×37 Posts
Default

When searching for big P-1 factors do I necessarily need to use high B1/B2 bounds? I can get big factors when k is a product of a bunch of small primes, right?
Does the probability of finding a big factor increase by using higher bounds?
MrHappy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-17, 13:49   #1392
James Heinrich
 
James Heinrich's Avatar
 
"James Heinrich"
May 2004
ex-Northern Ontario

64038 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrHappy View Post
Does the probability of finding a big factor increase by using higher bounds?
The probability of finding a factor of any kind increases with higher bounds. You are correct that it is possible to find large factors with small bounds (M31001941 and M11865241 are some more extreme examples of this). Your probability of finding any factor should be somewhere around 5% for a P-1 test, but whether you find a 130-bit monster or a 73.01-bit one that just missed TF is out of your control.

I would advise against choosing artificially small bounds (or manually choosing bounds at all unless you're very certain what you're doing) in hopes of finding large factors with small bounds. If such a small factor exists, P-1 will likely find it in stage1 anyways, saving you half a P-1 test.
James Heinrich is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-18, 01:48   #1393
flashjh
 
flashjh's Avatar
 
"Jerry"
Nov 2011
Vancouver, WA

1,123 Posts
Default

Is it true that any factor found in stage 1 would always be found in stage 2 also?
flashjh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-18, 01:51   #1394
Dubslow
Basketry That Evening!
 
Dubslow's Avatar
 
"Bunslow the Bold"
Jun 2011
40<A<43 -89<O<-88

3×29×83 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flashjh View Post
Is it true that any factor found in stage 1 would always be found in stage 2 also?
Yes, though the only way this would happen is if you skip the Stage 1 GCD.
Dubslow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-18, 01:56   #1395
flashjh
 
flashjh's Avatar
 
"Jerry"
Nov 2011
Vancouver, WA

21438 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubslow View Post
Yes, though the only way this would happen is if you skip the Stage 1 GCD.
I'm just looking at how much time all my systems spend in S1 vs S2. I know S2 is slower, but I think the time wasted in S1 when no factor is found would generally be made up by just running S2 and finding the factors anyway.

I know it has been discussed before, but what would be required to get future versions of P95 to just do S2 on all P-1, as an option? In a project like GPU72 (and many others, I'm sure), P-1 is always* done with enough memory, so skipping S1 would save me time. Just a thought...

* Not true, but it sounds great
flashjh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-18, 02:04   #1396
Dubslow
Basketry That Evening!
 
Dubslow's Avatar
 
"Bunslow the Bold"
Jun 2011
40<A<43 -89<O<-88

3×29×83 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flashjh View Post
I'm just looking at how much time all my systems spend in S1 vs S2. I know S2 is slower, but I think the time wasted in S1 when no factor is found would generally be made up by just running S2 and finding the factors anyway.

I know it has been discussed before, but what would be required to get future versions of P95 to just do S2 on all P-1, as an option? In a project like GPU72 (and many others, I'm sure), P-1 is always* done with enough memory, so skipping S1 would save me time. Just a thought...

* Not true, but it sounds great
Oh, I thought you meant doing the S1 work without checking for a factor. I don't think you can do S2 without S1, which is why changing S1 bounds means you toss any S2 work you had. (Edit: More proof is that you need the full S1 save file to run S2.)

Last fiddled with by Dubslow on 2012-08-18 at 02:05
Dubslow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-08-18, 02:08   #1397
flashjh
 
flashjh's Avatar
 
"Jerry"
Nov 2011
Vancouver, WA

21438 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubslow View Post
Oh, I thought you meant doing the S1 work without checking for a factor. I don't think you can do S2 without S1, which is why changing S1 bounds means you toss any S2 work you had. (Edit: More proof is that you need the full S1 save file to run S2.)
Right, but is that a necessary thing or a legacy of systems running P-1 with 8Mb years ago? So S1 generates necessary data for S2 that can not be computed before hand? Based on what I have read so far, I could only find what you said, that without the save file, P95 won't run S2.
flashjh is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


All times are UTC. The time now is 21:31.

Wed Apr 21 21:31:30 UTC 2021 up 13 days, 16:12, 0 users, load averages: 1.07, 1.54, 1.72

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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.