mersenneforum.org  

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2020-02-23, 22:27   #463
Happy5214
 
Happy5214's Avatar
 
"Alexander"
Nov 2008
The Alamo City

33·13 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by storm5510 View Post
This is my major peeve with PFGW, and one of the reasons I do not use it. The other, members working the Riesel prime search strongly urged using LLR. PRP vs LL. I understand their reasons.
PFGW can do a deterministic (i.e. proven prime rather than probably prime) P+1 test on Riesel candidates by passing the -tp argument to it. However, said algorithm is not as efficient as LLR, and I generally only use PFGW on Riesel candidates when the numbers are small (n < 10,000), where the cost of writing the LLR log to disk slows it down considerably versus PFGW (which only writes when a prime is found).
Happy5214 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-03-04, 22:27   #464
japelprime
 
japelprime's Avatar
 
"Erling B."
Dec 2005

34 Posts
Default

I also found a big speed difference llr in favor for thouse old cpu I am using. I stick to llr at the moment doing Riesel numbers. Thanks for all the help here.

Last fiddled with by japelprime on 2020-03-04 at 22:32
japelprime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-03-05, 00:08   #465
paulunderwood
 
paulunderwood's Avatar
 
Sep 2002
Database er0rr

23·3·139 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by japelprime View Post
I also found a big speed difference llr in favor for thouse old cpu I am using. I stick to llr at the moment doing Riesel numbers. Thanks for all the help here.
If there is a "big speed difference" then it is most likely to be due to the different FFT sizes used.

Last fiddled with by paulunderwood on 2020-03-05 at 07:05
paulunderwood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-03-05, 00:18   #466
rogue
 
rogue's Avatar
 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the

133348 Posts
Default

llr will be faster for most, if not all, numbers of the form k*b^n+/-c because it uses a different algorithm. I have purposefully not changed pfgw to use a faster algorithm because it allows for one program to verify the results of the other.
rogue is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-07-04, 11:29   #467
matzetoni
 
matzetoni's Avatar
 
Feb 2019

7010 Posts
Default

Is it possible to automatically stop pfgw once a prp is found?

I read about setting number_primes in the input file, but it doesn't seem to work for me :/
Does number_primes only work with confirmed primes (ignoring prps)?
matzetoni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-07-04, 13:19   #468
rogue
 
rogue's Avatar
 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the

22·7·11·19 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by matzetoni View Post
Is it possible to automatically stop pfgw once a prp is found?

I read about setting number_primes in the input file, but it doesn't seem to work for me :/
Does number_primes only work with confirmed primes (ignoring prps)?
Let's assume that you have {number_primes,$a,1}. This means that for each distinct value for $a, it will stop PRP testing that value when a prime is found.

So if you have multiple values for $a, it will continue searching.

Post your input file and explain what you are trying to accomplish.
rogue is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-07-04, 13:43   #469
pepi37
 
pepi37's Avatar
 
Dec 2011
After milion nines:)

2·5·131 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by matzetoni View Post
Is it possible to automatically stop pfgw once a prp is found?

I read about setting number_primes in the input file, but it doesn't seem to work for me :/
Does number_primes only work with confirmed primes (ignoring prps)?
LLR can do that
pepi37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-07-04, 14:45   #470
matzetoni
 
matzetoni's Avatar
 
Feb 2019

2×5×7 Posts
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogue View Post
Let's assume that you have {number_primes,$a,1}. This means that for each distinct value for $a, it will stop PRP testing that value when a prime is found.

So if you have multiple values for $a, it will continue searching.

Post your input file and explain what you are trying to accomplish.

I may misinterpreted the function of {number_primes,$a,1}.

I'd like to search for the smallest prp larger than some 10^n and I wish to stop the program once it found it, so it doesn't search the entire sieve file then.

I attached a sieve file for n=4k with candidates of the form 10^4000+c, made with fkbnsieve. So when pfgw finds 10^4000+"something" is prp, I'd like it to stop and search no further.
Attached Files
File Type: txt out10n-4000.txt (6.3 KB, 6 views)

Last fiddled with by matzetoni on 2020-07-04 at 14:46
matzetoni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-07-04, 15:34   #471
rogue
 
rogue's Avatar
 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the

22×7×11×19 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by matzetoni View Post
I may misinterpreted the function of {number_primes,$a,1}.

I'd like to search for the smallest prp larger than some 10^n and I wish to stop the program once it found it, so it doesn't search the entire sieve file then.

I attached a sieve file for n=4k with candidates of the form 10^4000+c, made with fkbnsieve. So when pfgw finds 10^4000+"something" is prp, I'd like it to stop and search no further.
I have only used number_primes with ABC format, but fkbnsieve doesn't output ABC format.

I think that you will need to use an edited to change to this format:

Code:
ABCD $a^4000+$b [10 61] // {number_primes,$a,1}
0 +50
but you might need to experiment. The 0 on the each line means "add 0 to the $a value". This means that $a will also be 10.
rogue is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-07-04, 16:09   #472
matzetoni
 
matzetoni's Avatar
 
Feb 2019

2×5×7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogue View Post
I have only used number_primes with ABC format, but fkbnsieve doesn't output ABC format.

I think that you will need to use an edited to change to this format:

Code:
ABCD $a^4000+$b [10 61] // {number_primes,$a,1}
0 +50
but you might need to experiment. The 0 on the each line means "add 0 to the $a value". This means that $a will also be 10.

That works! Thanks a lot!
matzetoni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-07-15, 20:47   #473
bchaffin
 
Sep 2010
Portland, OR

37110 Posts
Default Another repunit which fails with special modular reduction

I found another repunit which fails repeatedly when run with special modular reduction. This is using pfgw4.0.1, which uses square_carefully for the last 50 iterations. (See post https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...&postcount=415 for a previous case.)

In this case the offender is (10^4568899-1)/9:

Code:
Detected in MAXERR>0.45 (round off check) in prp_using_gwnum
Iteration: 15177501/15177550 ERROR: ROUND OFF 0.5>0.45
PFGW will automatically rerun the test with -a1
...
Detected in MAXERR>0.45 (round off check) in prp_using_gwnum
Iteration: 15177501/15177550 ERROR: ROUND OFF 0.5>0.45
PFGW will automatically rerun the test with -a6
(10^4568899-1)/9 ERROR DURING PROCESSING! (96541.0526s+0.0304s)
bchaffin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A possible bug in LLR/PFGW while using GWNUM (no bug in P95) Batalov Software 77 2015-04-14 09:01
PFGW 3.2.0 has been Released rogue Software 94 2010-09-14 21:39
PFGW 3.2.3 has been Released rogue Software 10 2009-10-28 07:07
PFGW 3.2.2 has been Released rogue Software 20 2009-08-23 12:14
PFGW 3.2.1 has been released rogue Software 5 2009-08-10 01:43

All times are UTC. The time now is 03:48.

Wed Aug 12 03:48:30 UTC 2020 up 25 days, 23:35, 1 user, load averages: 2.06, 1.82, 1.77

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.