20080807, 18:41  #122  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
10100001000111_{2} Posts 
Quote:
I'll be reviewing and adding your k=120M200M range to the page either today or tomorrow. Gary Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20080807 at 18:42 

20080808, 05:43  #123  
Jan 2005
111011111_{2} Posts 
Quote:
Also, I just thought that a list of primes above say n=1k would be handy for the same purpose too. (The lower one's are found quickly enough...) Anything like that to your avail? 

20080808, 22:49  #124  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
3·7·491 Posts 
Quote:
I need to rerun k<10M to get all of the primes. They were on a work laptop that I failed to copy off when I got laid off. For k=100M120M, you'll have to check with KEP. This is the one main base where I've been quite disorganized in bringing all of the primes together because it's so timeconsuming with the millions of small primes. Gary Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20080809 at 01:28 

20080809, 14:56  #125 
Quasi Admin Thing
May 2005
31^{2} Posts 
@ Gary: It's just a minor correction, but for Sierp Base 3 I only took k>110M to k<=120M... well no harm done
@ Michaf: I can see that I've all the primes for Sierpinski Base 3 for k>110M to k<=120M, on my gmail, I don't remember if I've your email but if you would like me to send you the primes that I way back send to Gary, feel free to PM me and give me your email, and then as fast as possible I'll send them to you :) Regards KEP 
20080811, 09:37  #126  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
10311_{10} Posts 
Quote:
k=125825886 would not be considered remaining. Although k=125825886/3^5=517802 has a prime at n=1 and n=2 and k=125825886/3^4=1553406 has a prime at n=1, k=125825886/3^3=4660218 is still remaining. So continuing to test k=125825886 would be a duplication of work, hence it is eliminated. The same issue exists for the following k's that can be eliminated: kvalue : divisibile by : reduced k : comments about reduced k 138570858 : 3^2 : 15396762 : Reduced k remained when spreadsheet sent. Now prime at n=46233. 138881448 : 3 : 46293816 : Has no small primes so must have a larger prime.* 178029648 : 3 : 59343216 : Reduced k still remains. 179527644 : 3^2 : 19947516 : Reduced k remained when spreadsheet sent. Now prime at n=44420. 182389698 : 3^2 : 20265522 : Reduced k still remains. 188512128 : 3 : 62837376 : Reduced k still remains. 189011016 : 3 : 63003672 : Reduced k still remains. 197830008 : 3 : 65943336 : Reduced k still remains. You have to check k/3^q for ALL q and see if ANY of those k's are remaining (instead of only checking k/3^q for the HIGHEST possible q). If any of the reduced k's are remaining, your k can be eliminated. Base 3 is BY FAR the most difficult in this regard. Besides having one of the highest conjectures, it is the 2nd lowest base so we're frequently having to check k/3^q for 56 qvalues or more and possibly as high as 1520 qvalues in the future for any potential k remaining. From your list of 381 kvalues remaining, this eliminates 9 k's leaving 372 k's for k=120M200M. I'll update the web pages later today. *  I do not know what the prime is for k=46293816 but it must be n<=25K because it is not remaining, was not found by the mini drive, and is not on the top5000 site. Since you did k=30M100M, do you know what the prime is? Gary Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20080811 at 10:19 

20080811, 19:02  #127 
Jan 2005
479 Posts 
Hmm... I was annoyed in that I couldn't find that k's prime in my logs, so I retested it to 25k,
and to my astonishment, there is NO prime upto 25k! (for k = 46293816) It could have been a false positive prime in the pfgwphase? I sure hope it is not; I think it might be time to get all the primes in order, sorted by k, and recheck every single one of them :( 
20080811, 20:01  #128  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
3·7·491 Posts 
Quote:
No need to recheck every one of them. There's no reason to think that you missed any primes. Can you send me all of your primes for k=30M110M and 120M200M for n>=1000? It's up to me to keep and organize them all. That shouldn't be too large of a file zipped and I can easily recreate a list of primes for n<1000 for all other k's if and when needed. KEP, can you send me in an Email all of your primes for n>=1000 for k=110M120M for Sierp base 3? I need to get an organized list of all primes together sorted by kvalue for this base. Not having such a list is creating too much confusion, especially on my part. Thanks, Gary Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20080811 at 20:07 

20080811, 20:36  #129  
Quasi Admin Thing
May 2005
31^{2} Posts 
Quote:
Regards KEP 

20080811, 21:07  #130 
Jan 2005
479 Posts 
I got wise at about 150M...
Since then I tested with pfgw up until n=1k. It proves to be the 'quickest' way. It allows for more sieving, which it more efficient then the trial factoring that pfgw does. But alas, the removal of the 'primed k's ' is a bit more tedious, but easily doable scriptable. Oh,and I think 10M ranges is more managable, since srfile takes too long to remove a k when there are more then say 200k's remaining. 
20080811, 21:56  #131  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
3·7·491 Posts 
Quote:
It's not so much the manual effort required as it is that finding billions of small primes would get very boring very fast. That's why we pause to find larger primes at times. It has been my intent to 'pause' every k=50M to do sieving and then searching up to n=100K. But for k>100M, I'm going to suggest doing it every k=100M. This is so that minidrives (i.e. miniteam efforts) are reasonable in scope and size. It's very difficult to administer if 100's and 1000's of primes are being found. Keep in mind that I have to remove k's from files, update web pages, cross reference k's that are multiples of 3, update a full list of primes for all k's, etc. as the team effort progresses. Starting a team effort at n=10K would take too much time to administer. It's better if one person does it and then sends a list of primes to me. I can then easily sort the list by kvalue (if not already done) and we have what we need for future reference. Reference your search for k<500M on the Riesel side, it looks like you are doing 'pieces' up to n=5K, then n=10K, etc. The problem with that: Can you imagine trying to do a team effort for k<500M starting at n=5K or 10K. We're pretty much stuck waiting for you to finish at least part of your range to n=25K so that we can get a reasonablesized team effort started. If I had to make one request of your effort: Please search all k<100M to n=25K and send us the primes and k's remaining, then do k=100M200M to n=25K, etc. In other words, don't to all k to n=15K, then all k to n=20K, etc. Otherwise, we're going to be waiting 34 months for you to finish the entire range. The sieve files become too large for a team effort if we have too large of a krange at too low of an nrange. Thanks, Gary Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20080811 at 22:16 

20080811, 22:03  #132  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
3·7·491 Posts 
Quote:
As for 10M ranges being more managable, are you referring to searching n<=25K? If so, I also found 10M ranges to be the most managable. I still prefer to run PFGW to n=10K even though I'm sure running PFGW to n=1K is more efficient on CPU time. Although it takes more total CPU time, I don't have time for a lot of manual intervention. I have one slower dualcore machine in a corner that I just plug in a range and then totally forget it until it is done. Gary 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Bases 33100 reservations/statuses/primes  Siemelink  Conjectures 'R Us  1678  20210308 09:29 
Bases 251500 reservations/statuses/primes  gd_barnes  Conjectures 'R Us  2261  20210306 20:09 
Riesel base 3 reservations/statuses/primes  KEP  Conjectures 'R Us  1082  20210303 19:13 
Bases 101250 reservations/statuses/primes  gd_barnes  Conjectures 'R Us  890  20210224 18:35 
Bases 432 reservations/statuses/primes  gd_barnes  Conjectures 'R Us  1431  20210218 16:05 