mersenneforum.org > Data Status of p-1....
 User Name Remember Me? Password
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2005-03-27, 17:07 #23 dave_0273     Oct 2003 Australia, Brisbane 1D616 Posts Status of p-1 using the 21st of March status files... Code:  M NUMBER 0-12 0 13 0 14 0 15 167 16 2 17 84 18 233 19 1367 20 1107 21 527 22 305 23 294 24 264 25 146 26 109 27 44 28 0 29 0 30 0 Code: 0.1M RANGE NUMBER CHANGE 15.0 100 0 15.9 67 0 16.9 2 0 17.6 83 0 17.9 1 0 18.6 1 -27 18.7 0 -102 18.8 113 -65 18.9 119 0 19.0 0 -127 19.1 113 0 19.2 136 0 19.3 148 0 19.4 133 0 19.5 138 0 19.6 153 0 19.7 235 0 19.8 130 0 19.9 181 0
 2005-04-02, 19:13 #24 dave_0273     Oct 2003 Australia, Brisbane 47010 Posts Status of p-1 using the 2nd April 2005 status files Code:  M NUMBER 0-14 0 15 167 16 2 17 84 18 233 19 1366 20 1108 21 531 22 306 23 296 24 270 25 147 26 120 27 49 28 5 29 1 30 0 Code:  0.1MRANGE NUMBER CHANGE 15.0 100 0 15.9 67 0 16.9 2 0 17.6 83 0 17.9 1 0 18.6 1 0 18.7 0 0 18.8 113 0 18.9 119 0 19.0 0 0 19.1 113 0 19.2 136 0 19.3 148 0 19.4 133 0 19.5 137 -1 19.6 153 0 19.7 235 0 19.8 130 0 19.9 181 0 We are flying along. 1 exponent done this week. No, i'm just kidding. Manual forums are currently down so the work done this week could not be submitted. This weeks work will most likely show up next week. I also did a block of work on exponents that were p-1ed to extremely low bounds. This work did not show up as technically (acording to my program at least) those exponents had already been p-1ed. Last fiddled with by dave_0273 on 2005-04-02 at 19:15
 2005-04-14, 08:42 #25 dave_0273     Oct 2003 Australia, Brisbane 2·5·47 Posts Status of p-1 using the 12th April 2005 status files Code:  M NUMBER 0-13 0 14 0 15 167 16 2 17 83 18 2 19 1366 20 1107 21 531 22 308 23 296 24 271 25 149 26 125 27 60 28 8 29 2 30 0 Code:  0.1MRANGE NUMBER CHANGE 15.0 100 0 15.9 67 0 16.9 2 0 17.6 83 0 17.9 0 -1 18.6 1 0 18.7 0 0 18.8 0 -113 18.9 1 -118 19.0 0 0 19.1 113 0 19.2 136 0 19.3 148 0 19.4 133 0 19.5 137 0 19.6 153 0 19.7 235 0 19.8 130 0 19.9 181 0
 2005-04-30, 02:30 #26 dave_0273     Oct 2003 Australia, Brisbane 1D616 Posts Status of p-1 using the 27th April status files Code:  M NUMBER 0-13 0 14 0 15 167 16 1 17 83 18 1 19 1231 20 1108 21 532 22 311 23 298 24 271 25 152 26 134 27 67 28 18 29 5 30 0 Code:  0.1MRANGE NUMBER CHANGE 15.0 100 0 15.9 67 0 16.9 1 -1 17.6 83 0 18.6 1 0 18.9 0 -1 19.0 0 0 19.1 113 0 19.2 1 -135 19.3 148 0 19.4 133 0 19.5 137 0 19.6 153 0 19.7 235 0 19.8 130 0 19.9 181 0
 2005-05-14, 12:04 #27 dave_0273     Oct 2003 Australia, Brisbane 2×5×47 Posts Status of p-1 using the 12th May status files Code:  M NUMBER 0-13 0 14 0 15 167 16 0 17 83 18 0 19 1230 20 1108 21 532 22 313 23 299 24 275 25 153 26 137 27 79 28 22 29 8 30 0 Code:  0.1MRANGE NUMBER CHANGE 15.0 100 0 15.9 67 0 16.9 0 -1 17.6 83 0 18.6 0 -1 18.9 0 0 19.0 0 0 19.1 113 0 19.2 1 0 19.3 148 0 19.4 132 -1 19.5 137 0 19.6 153 0 19.7 235 0 19.8 130 0 19.9 181 0 It appears that no work was done this week or so, but that i just because the results haven't been submitted because the manual pages were down. I am about to bundle all the results together now and email them off to George, so they should hopefully be in the status files next week.
 2005-06-27, 07:53 #28 dave_0273     Oct 2003 Australia, Brisbane 2·5·47 Posts Status of p-1 using the 19th June, 2005 Code:  M NUMBER 0-15 0 16 0 17 0 18 0 19 547 20 1105 21 531 22 313 23 303 24 281 25 161 26 150 27 103 28 32 29 20 30 0 Code:  0.1MRANGE NUMBER CHANGE 15.0 0 -100 15.9 0 -67 17.5 0 0 17.6 0 -83 17.7 0 0 17.8 0 0 17.9 0 0 18.0 0 0 18.1 0 0 18.2 0 0 18.3 0 0 18.4 0 0 18.5 0 0 18.6 0 0 18.7 0 0 18.8 0 0 18.9 0 0 19.0 0 0 19.1 0 -113 19.2 1 0 19.3 0 -148 19.4 0 -132 19.5 0 -137 19.6 1 -152 19.7 233 -2 19.8 131 +1 19.9 181 0 20.0 133 ? 20.1 90 ? 20.2 117 ? 20.3 101 ? 20.4 108 ? 20.5 125 ? 20.6 112 ? 20.7 92 ? 20.8 126 ? 20.9 101 ? I have FINALLY got my computer up and working again. Appologies for those that have missed not having the status of p-1. I should be more active around the forums once again now. Everything up to (and including) 18M is now done. There are just a few sets left in the 19M range now and then we get to start on the 20 millions.
 2005-06-27, 10:10 #29 garo     Aug 2002 Termonfeckin, IE 22·691 Posts Excellent!
 2005-06-27, 16:15 #30 lycorn     "GIMFS" Sep 2002 Oeiras, Portugal 1,493 Posts Great work, dave! Just one quick question: what is the meaning of the figures in the 28-30M ranges?
2005-06-28, 04:02   #31
dave_0273

Oct 2003
Australia, Brisbane

47010 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by lycorn Just one quick question: what is the meaning of the figures in the 28-30M ranges?
They are first time tests that have been completed already but did not have a p-1 test done on them at all. Primenet is currently handing out first time LL tests in the 29M range, however very few have been completed yet. In the next couple of months I would expect the numbers in the 25-30M range to increase as more first time tests are returned that have not had a p-1 test done on them.

 2005-06-28, 08:17 #32 garo     Aug 2002 Termonfeckin, IE 276410 Posts I have a proposal to make. Since we are way ahead of the current doublechecks, we could divert a few resources to doing some P-1 for numbers that are ahead of the first-timers. There are two problems with the proposal as I can see. 1) A P-1 on a first-timer will take a long time. More than 4 times the time. 2) With factoring and LL edges being so close, there is a chance that something gets messed up and work gets wasted. Plus we should only do P-1 on numbers that have already had the required amount of trial factoring done on them which reduces our list of candidates drastically.
 2005-06-28, 09:23 #33 dave_0273     Oct 2003 Australia, Brisbane 2·5·47 Posts I have often thought, and have often been asked why we don't do p-1ing ahead of the leading edge of LL testing. Basically those two reasons are why I have never tried it. There is no way (with the current amount of people in mersenne-aries) that we could keep ahead of the leading edge. We could only do a small percentage. The other thing that we would need is for another group to be working with us doing the trail factoring before we do the p-1. However, one the biggest reasons why I have never bothered to go ahead of the leading edge of LL testing is because if people really wanted to do that sort of work, they could always do it the semi-automated way. They could reserve 50 or so exponents, do the p-1 and then release them again. Because the work is therefore technically assigned through primenet, they wouldn't be duplicating work and they wouldn't be stepping on each others toes. This doesn't work with mersenne-aries because you just can't get enough work this way. The majority of exponents are p-1ed on the first LL test. Even when I tried to reserve 50 exponents, I would find that I would get less than 5 that would require a p-1 test.

 Thread Tools

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Primeinator Operation Billion Digits 5 2011-12-06 02:35 1997rj7 Lone Mersenne Hunters 27 2008-09-29 13:52 Uncwilly Operation Billion Digits 22 2005-10-25 14:05 paulunderwood 3*2^n-1 Search 2 2005-03-13 17:03 1997rj7 Lone Mersenne Hunters 25 2004-06-18 16:46

All times are UTC. The time now is 04:48.

Sat Oct 16 04:48:39 UTC 2021 up 84 days, 23:17, 0 users, load averages: 0.79, 0.88, 1.04

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.