mersenneforum.org Welcome Ben Delo
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2020-08-22, 02:22 #56 Uncwilly 6809 > 6502     """"""""""""""""""" Aug 2003 101×103 Posts 235718 Posts They are the second part of the PRP-VDF run. They prove that the PRP was run without errors and that the number is composite.
2020-08-22, 02:27   #57
retina
Undefined

"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

2·23·137 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Uncwilly They prove that the PRP was run without errors and that the number is composite ...
... or a suspected prime, as the case may be.

 2020-08-22, 02:28 #58 Batalov     "Serge" Mar 2008 Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2 3×5×641 Posts Thanks. Just as an aside, maybe it is a bit of a misnomer. It is like giving 99.9% of population "a certificate" of NOT being an MD or PhD :-) Maybe these tests should be called "CONF", or "VAL", or "VER".
2020-08-22, 02:31   #59
retina
Undefined

"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair

630210 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Batalov Thanks. Just as an aside, maybe it is a bit of a misnomer. It is like giving 99.9% of population "a certificate" of NOT being an MD or PhD :-) Maybe these tests should be called "CONF", or "VAL", or "VER".
It's actually a certificate of proof of work. Not the end results of prime/composite.

 2020-08-22, 04:32 #60 Prime95 P90 years forever!     Aug 2002 Yeehaw, FL 32×853 Posts I think of CERT as short for certification. You are certifying the validity of the proof file (which showed the Mersenne number to be prime or composite). Last fiddled with by Prime95 on 2020-08-22 at 04:33
2020-08-22, 11:06   #61
ATH
Einyen

Dec 2003
Denmark

32·5·71 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by retina It's actually a certificate of proof of work. Not the end results of prime/composite.
It should also be a proof that the result is correct, so it should catch incorrect results due to hardware errors. That is the claim of those that understand the proof in the paper.

If it was "only" a proof of work, it would not be enough to count as a double check.

It would be nice to test that, if we had a known faulty machine and disabled Gerbicz error checking and see if the proof failed.

Last fiddled with by ATH on 2020-08-22 at 11:08

 2020-08-25, 15:25 #62 kriesel     "TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17" Mar 2017 US midwest 2·11·269 Posts Another Ben Delo Cert sighting: https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...exp_hi=&full=1
2020-08-25, 23:33   #63
preda

"Mihai Preda"
Apr 2015

137510 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by kriesel Another Ben Delo Cert sighting: https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...exp_hi=&full=1
Some funky P-1 on that exponent in March 2019. Why?

2019-03-30 Kriesel NF-PM1 B1=1340000, B2=6700000, e=2
2019-01-24 Kriesel NF-PM1 B1=1205000, B2=39655000, e=2

(the second round of P-1 brought almost zero benefit)

2020-08-26, 00:31   #64
kriesel

"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest

2×11×269 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by preda Some funky P-1 on that exponent in March 2019. Why? 2019-03-30 Kriesel NF-PM1 B1=1340000, B2=6700000, e=2 2019-01-24 Kriesel NF-PM1 B1=1205000, B2=39655000, e=2 (the second round of P-1 brought almost zero benefit)
After this long, I can't be sure. Maybe it was intended to be B2=67M.

 2021-03-21, 00:47 #65 ixfd64 Bemusing Prompter     "Danny" Dec 2002 California 32·269 Posts
2021-03-21, 01:10   #66
chalsall
If I May

"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002

2×5,021 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by ixfd64 Uh-oh...
Big boys play big boy games.

All times are UTC. The time now is 12:09.

Tue Nov 30 12:09:58 UTC 2021 up 130 days, 6:38, 0 users, load averages: 0.86, 0.95, 1.00