mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Prime Search Projects > Riesel Prime Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2020-08-09, 16:44   #364
Happy5214
 
Happy5214's Avatar
 
"Alexander"
Nov 2008
The Alamo City

32·43 Posts
Default

I have completed the (near-)Woodall k's, except for k=1993191, to n=350k. I found 2 primes:
  • 1268979*2^332833-1
  • 197673*2^341268-1

pepi37 kindly ran a large chunk of the range, and he found the following 2 primes:
  • 251749*2^333881-1
  • 1467763*2^340379-1

The list of k's tested can be found in the previous post.
Happy5214 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-15, 00:16   #365
Dylan14
 
Dylan14's Avatar
 
"Dylan"
Mar 2017

3×173 Posts
Default k = 50171

k = 50171 is at n = 2.945 M, no primes found, continuing...
Dylan14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-16, 09:38   #366
Happy5214
 
Happy5214's Avatar
 
"Alexander"
Nov 2008
The Alamo City

32·43 Posts
Default k = 1549573

k=1549573 has now been tested to n=300k. The known prime at n=260199 (on Prime Pages) was re-confirmed, and no new primes were found. I am releasing this k. The LLR log is attached (it's version 3.8.24, so PRP residues instead of LLR).
Attached Files
File Type: txt lresults.txt (59.1 KB, 30 views)
Happy5214 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-19, 17:08   #367
Viliam Furik
 
Jul 2018
Martin, Slovakia

23·33 Posts
Default

I restarted the search for primes with k = 105105.

So far I have checked up to n = 395 000 and found 4 primes:
105105*2^328791-1
105105*2^333964-1
105105*2^358832-1
105105*2^387091-1

Also regarding k=20020913, I have found another prime:
20020913*2^862692-1

I will update those k's in Prime Wiki.
Viliam Furik is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-08-19, 18:44   #368
Viliam Furik
 
Jul 2018
Martin, Slovakia

3308 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viliam Furik View Post
So far I have checked up to n = 395 000 and found 4 primes
Silly me... 5 primes. I forgot to mention n = 260723.
Viliam Furik is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-08, 05:39   #369
bur
 
Aug 2020

2×3×5 Posts
Default

I was testing k = 1281979 for n<= 100000 and interestingly the first 10 n for which this is prime are prime themselves. After that unfortunately there's n = 1005 which obviously isn't. But the ratio of n being prime vs being composite continues to be very high for the remainder of the range.

Is that a known property of some k and is it known why it happens? Is there a connection to Mersenne?


Nothing like that on the Proth side, but there the n that yield primes seem to come in pairs of two that are close to each other (5-10% difference). Though it might just be the brain's inbuild pattern recognition going overboard. So I'll keep testing. If there's something the next n should be in the 3e5 range. ;)

Last fiddled with by bur on 2020-09-08 at 05:41
bur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-08, 06:41   #370
kar_bon
 
kar_bon's Avatar
 
Mar 2006
Germany

2×3×52×19 Posts
Default

1281979*2^n-1 has a Nash weight of 1789, so relatively low.
1281979 \equiv 1 mod 3 so all primes of that sequence are only odd n-values.
k-values with 2 mod 3 can only produce primes with even n's, and k's divisible by 3 can produce primes with odd/even n-values.

1281979*2^n+1 has a low Nash weight of 847, so there should less primes for this sequence.

The Liskovets-Gallot conjectures study the contribution of odd/even n-values of such seqs.
There exits k-values which never produce primes for any n-value like the Riesel problem.

PS: If your're done you can list the prime n-values in this thread and I can include those in the Wiki, both sides (Proth /Riesel) possible. Don't forget to give the search limits then.

Last fiddled with by kar_bon on 2020-09-08 at 06:47 Reason: PS
kar_bon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-08, 07:44   #371
bur
 
Aug 2020

2·3·5 Posts
Default

kar_bon, I never really understood the Nash weight. It is an indicator for how many candidates remain after sieving? So I would think a low weight is good, since few candidates after sieving is favorable? What do I miss?

I don't know what is average number of primes in n < 1e5 range, but I think there were maybe 15 for this k. Is that so little? Proth was giving similar number of primes.

Quote:
If your're done you can list the prime n-values in this thread and I can include those in the Wiki, both sides (Proth /Riesel) possible. Don't forget to give the search limits then
I'll do that. 0 <= n <= 1e5 is done for both Riesel/Proth. I don't have the results here, but will post this evening.


The main task I want to accomplish is finding a mega prime using Proth20, so I'm currently sieving 3320000 <= n <= 4100000 for Proth side. But I also plan to do the remaining smaller n values for both Riesel/Proth using LLR on CPU. I'll post them here in the future.

Last fiddled with by bur on 2020-09-08 at 07:44
bur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-08, 09:10   #372
kar_bon
 
kar_bon's Avatar
 
Mar 2006
Germany

285010 Posts
Default

The less the Nash weight is the less candidates remain after sieving is correct, but also the less chance to find a prime: low Nash = less cand. = less primes.

You could choose a lower k-value which produce smaller test timings for same n-values as 1281979.
Check the Wiki for low weight k-values to see the difference. You could sieve and test some higher ranges to get a feeling of those.
Looking other tables in the Wiki and sorting by #primes or Nash could help, too.
kar_bon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-08, 16:59   #373
bur
 
Aug 2020

111102 Posts
Default

So the number of primes per n decreases stronger than the number of candidates per n?


Here are the n values that produce Riesel primes:

Code:
1281979 * 2^n - 1
0 <= n <= 20000

3
7
43
79
107
157
269
307
373
397
1005
1013
1765
1987
2269
6623
7083
7365
10199
16219


bold values indicate primes
I have completed the same for Proth side, but since it's a work in progress, I'll post once I'm at larger n.
Quote:
You could choose a lower k-value which produce smaller test timings for same n-values as 1281979.
There's a longer story behind why I chose that k... :D

I have two computers at work I can use for crunching, both are using CPU for Primegrid projects. I want to keep it that way, because I like the conjecture solving. So the cheapest way to do more crunching would be to buy to mid-low-end GPUs such as the GTX 1650 and use those for other projects. Then I found out LLR on GPUs is considered a waste of time.

But - there's a new software Proth2.0 that apparently tests Proth primes quite efficiently on GPUs. So I decided to find Proth primes. But PG has three Proth prime subprojects and covers a lot of small k's... Around that time I discovered my birth date is a prime number and also large enough not to interfere with PG. Also that it's prime could result in the interesting combination of prime k, prime n and prime b. I know large k hardly change anything in regard to total digits but make computation slower and I also knew the Nash weight is not that high using nash.exe, but I will keep that k. If I find a mega prime with it it will at least be a somewhat rare k ... ;)

Last fiddled with by bur on 2020-09-08 at 17:09
bur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-09-08, 18:23   #374
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

23·32·61 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bur View Post
So the number of primes per n decreases stronger than the number of candidates per n?)
Nope. But the opposite isn't true, either.
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best Work for Finding Primes Unregistered Information & Answers 9 2012-06-24 13:50
Which settings to choose for best work? jmb1982 Software 2 2009-04-07 09:33
Help test 210885 - Find a new top 5000 prime! SlashDude Riesel Prime Search 121 2008-01-03 08:47
Help test 2995125705 - Find a new top 5000 prime! SlashDude Riesel Prime Search 538 2007-05-08 01:42
The fastest way to a top-5000 prime? lsoule 15k Search 13 2005-09-19 20:24

All times are UTC. The time now is 21:28.

Sat Oct 24 21:28:58 UTC 2020 up 44 days, 18:39, 2 users, load averages: 1.86, 1.86, 1.82

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.