mersenneforum.org  

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2020-08-19, 18:15   #1
henryzz
Just call me Henry
 
henryzz's Avatar
 
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)

131478 Posts
Default Are the recent advancements for GIMPS (VDF, Gerbicz check, Jacobi check) worth publishing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsall View Post
Which, in your opinion, is more useful?

Doing a DC will point out borderline kit, but I think Aaron's years-long SDC effort has cleared out most of the known noise.

How trusting are you of the PRP-proof mechanism (I presume, based on the extensive collaboration and peer-review, quite)?

The call, of course, is yours. And if I may please say, this has been truly awesome to observe!

Agile in Action; almost a case-study.
Peer reviewed on the forum yes. Is the application of VDF for prp testing enough of a new development to be worth publishing? A peer review for publication in a journal would add a lot of confidence to our results.
henryzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-19, 19:33   #2
chalsall
If I May
 
chalsall's Avatar
 
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados

2×4,643 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kriesel View Post
Since the LL DC is lagging several years behind LL first time testing, the identification of borderline or reliably-unreliable kit may come years too late. Unless there are enough error codes caught in the prime95 /mprime result's errors field. Which does nothing for Mlucas, CUDALucas, clLucas, gpuowl runs.
In my world, all data is interesting.

But, as you suggest, some might not be worth collecting in the bigger calculus (economic tradeoffs, expediency, etc).

henryzz question really perked up my ears. Is this seminal? Worth formally publishing?
chalsall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-19, 20:13   #3
henryzz
Just call me Henry
 
henryzz's Avatar
 
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)

5×31×37 Posts
Default

It's worth bearing in mind that this isn't the only advancement we have had recently. The Jacobi checks for LL and Gerbiz test for prp are also newish. Maybe a paper reviewing all of these advancements would be in order.
henryzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-19, 20:37   #4
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

3·2,917 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by henryzz View Post
It's worth bearing in mind that this isn't the only advancement we have had recently. The Jacobi checks for LL and Gerbiz test for prp are also newish. Maybe a paper reviewing all of these advancements would be in order.
Indeed. Paul (Xilman) or someone else with a low Erdos number needs to be involved. Also, if small bits of minor work on the paper could be handed out so us non-math mortals can get named that would be great. Most of us can generate graphs from given data sets, or run some simple stats. Early beta testers (v30.1) might get a nod.
Uncwilly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-19, 20:40   #5
chalsall
If I May
 
chalsall's Avatar
 
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados

2×4,643 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by henryzz View Post
Maybe a paper reviewing all of these advancements would be in order.
A new tagline: "GIMPS. We're not just Geeks; a few of us are also occasionally seminal.

()
chalsall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-19, 20:44   #6
henryzz
Just call me Henry
 
henryzz's Avatar
 
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)

131478 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncwilly View Post
Indeed. Paul (Xilman) or someone else with a low Erdos number needs to be involved. Also, if small bits of minor work on the paper could be handed out so us non-math mortals can get named that would be great. Most of us can generate graphs from given data sets, or run some simple stats. Early beta testers (v30.1) might get a nod.
Define low Erdos number. With a couple of publications in Medical Statistics, I believe I have gotten down to 5. There are people on this forum with far lower and much more maths experience than me.
henryzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-19, 20:52   #7
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

3·2,917 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by henryzz View Post
Define low Erdos number. With a couple of publications in Medical Statistics, I believe I have gotten down to 5. There are people on this forum with far lower and much more maths experience than me.
Paul is 2. I think that is about as close as can be hoped for.

Last fiddled with by Uncwilly on 2020-08-19 at 20:52
Uncwilly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-19, 20:54   #8
chalsall
If I May
 
chalsall's Avatar
 
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados

928610 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by henryzz View Post
Define low Erdos number. With a couple of publications in Medical Statistics, I believe I have gotten down to 5. There are people on this forum with far lower and much more maths experience than me.
The point being...

Perhaps this is worth formally writing up.

We have a lot of talent here, which could be brought to bear.

No need to compare how large or small our numbers are. Simply, who can (and is willing) to help?
chalsall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-19, 21:04   #9
pinhodecarlos
 
pinhodecarlos's Avatar
 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK

474710 Posts
Default

1) literature review is a must before even trying to publish
2) search on https://www.scopus.com/home.uri for medium to highest impact journals

Last fiddled with by pinhodecarlos on 2020-08-19 at 21:07
pinhodecarlos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-19, 21:07   #10
chalsall
If I May
 
chalsall's Avatar
 
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados

244616 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pinhodecarlos View Post
1) literature review is a must before even trying to publish
Presumption this has already been done.

Also, in Engineering Journals, simply detailing how something was done successfully (even if leveraging on prior art) is considered valuable.
chalsall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-19, 21:17   #11
pinhodecarlos
 
pinhodecarlos's Avatar
 
"Carlos Pinho"
Oct 2011
Milton Keynes, UK

47×101 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chalsall View Post
Presumption this has already been done.

Also, in Engineering Journals, simply detailing how something was done successfully (even if leveraging on prior art) is considered valuable.
Sometimes papers are on hold for months for peer review, goes back and forth for corrections (peer reviewers and editors) , so you will always need to get in touch with high qualified people on the subject to have guarantees that what you want to publish is new, hence my comment on the literature review.

I can provide any academic paper if you make me a list of DOI’s.

Last fiddled with by pinhodecarlos on 2020-08-19 at 21:21
pinhodecarlos is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Gerbicz/double-check errors DJN PrimeNet 4 2020-02-20 20:01
Weird Jacobi check behaviour cdepth Software 12 2018-12-20 16:31
Application of Jacobi check to P-1 factoring (paging owftheevil and other coding wizards) kriesel Software 7 2018-09-11 13:32
error during Jacobi check on 330,000,000+ exponent evanh Hardware 5 2018-02-20 03:46
Endlessly Running Jacobi error check on v29.3 emiller Software 10 2017-11-14 10:26

All times are UTC. The time now is 04:31.

Sat Oct 31 04:31:24 UTC 2020 up 51 days, 1:42, 2 users, load averages: 1.49, 2.07, 2.36

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.