20081227, 15:28  #177 
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
31·67 Posts 
I'm fiddling with a little program that compares a file of candidates with a file of primes and outputs a file with the remaining ks? (It's very specific to this conjecture.)
I have it working but I'm going to refine it. Which format do you prefer for remaining ks? xxxxxxxx yyyyyyy zzzzzzzz or xxxxxxxx*3^n1 yyyyyyy*3^n1 zzzzzzzz*3^n1 Last fiddled with by Flatlander on 20081227 at 15:36 
20081227, 18:55  #178  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
3^{3}×383 Posts 
Quote:
The first one. I can quickly concatenate it into a bunch of k's to list on the web pages. Gary 

20081228, 11:08  #179  
"Jason Goatcher"
Mar 2005
6663_{8} Posts 
Quote:
With all due respect, I feel like I am being DISRESPECTED. If my range ends up being a mishmashed piece of crap then don't accept it, but don't just unreserve it on a whim. Edit: How about I send you what I've already done so you know I'm reliable? I've had to restart my machine at least once since I started, meaning an edit to one of the files. So if you find any mistakes(which I don't think you will), than you can tell me to give it up and I'll do something else. Sound fair? Last fiddled with by jasong on 20081228 at 11:23 

20081229, 06:06  #180  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
3^{3}·383 Posts 
Quote:
What irritates me so much about this, Jason, is not so much that you took on one of the most difficult efforts here while knowing little about it, it's that you reserved such a HUGE range on one of the most difficult efforts and proceeded to inspire no confidence in your manner of attacking it. That after you reserved a huge sieving range at NPLB and messed it up badly after messing up your LLRing range. The sieving mess delayed us nearly 2 weeks on that sieving drive as we piecemealed together to find out what ranges that you had left undone, which were many of them. You reserved nearly half of the range that we had in the entire sieving drive. I and several others were not happy at all. On this effort, you initially indicated that you would try to "daisy chain" sieve (whatever that means) using NewPGen before finding out that you needed to use srsieve. You have had to restart twice, missed the very elementary PFGW switch f, and didn't have it stop after finding one prime for each k, another very elementary mistake. You also gave a 2.5day estimate for at least a 30day effort on 2 cores. You'll have to excuse me if you don't inspire any confidence nor respect after that and the NPLB mess. Back to your post: I won't be able to judge how accurate you are until I see you complete at least part of the range to n=25K. Do you have any part of the range complete to n=25K yet? It's easy to use PFGW to get it up to n=2.5K or 5K or 10K. Making the transition to the sieving and LLRing/Phroting for n=2.5K25K (or 5K25K or 10K25K) is not easy at all unless you know exactly what you are doing. If you're still PFGWing, me checking you won't give me any confidence that you will correctly make the transition to the higher nrange. I'll tell you what, I will rereserve the range for you on one condition only: I will ask for the THIRD time and I expect an answer this time: 1. Why have you chosen one of the most difficult efforts at CRUS? 2. Why have you reserved such a huge range? Why not just try k=700M710M? There would be no problem finishing that in 34 days on 2 cores. One more question that I want answered but you never did so satisfactorily: How do you intend to attack this, what is your estimated completion date, and how did you arrive at your estimate? I need exact details that might look something like: 1. PFGW all k's to n=5K using the f switch. 2. Use xxxx script/program/process to compare primes found to total k's in the range to determine k's remaining. 3. Use k's remaining from #2 to sieve n=5K25K using srsieve. (Note: Please state HOW you will use srsieve...that is the switches you will use and the input file that you will use.) 4. Use Phrot to test k's remaining for n=5K25K. 5. Estimated completion is Jan. 30th. It took me X days to complete an k=10M range to n=25K therefore, it should take 10X days to complete the k=100M range to n=25K. That is not the method that I recommend nor necessarily a reasonable estimate but it is the level of detail that I need to know that you understand what you are doing. Answering those questions will force you to plan ahead, which is what is needed on a difficult effort like this. This is not something that you can do a whim like many efforts. If you fail to answer the questions again, regardless of your response, I will ask one more time. Fail again and I will not read your future posts about this effort because I won't think you're serious about doing this correctly. That's 5 total times that I'll ask the same questions. I think that's more than fair. I hope you do the right thing with your next response. If the idea of these conjectures interests you, why not reserve some files from one of our preexisting drives? We have plenty of them and if you reserve small ranges that would take less than one week on 12 cores, I won't ask any questions. Gary Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20081229 at 06:25 

20081229, 16:56  #181 
Quasi Admin Thing
May 2005
2^{2}·241 Posts 
Status for Riesel base 3 k>100M to k<200M:
Core 1: n=61078 (67 PRPs found) Core 2: n=68871 (79 PRPs found) Core 3: n=54007 (51 PRPs found) Core 4: n=57834 (54 PRPs found) + 16 additional PRPs for the n=25001 to n=26000 range. A total of PRPs out of 490 possible is found. Less than 250000 tests remain. ETA is 46 weeks, maybe less since now a total of 4 commited cores on the Quad has been reinstated for this particular challenge. Regards KEP EDIT: k=3677878 is still at n=298000 and testings is not scheduled to begin for earliest 1 week from now! (~13550 remain) Last fiddled with by KEP on 20081229 at 16:59 
20081229, 21:09  #182 
Jan 2005
111011111_{2} Posts 
I have had very little time due to workissues (moving a whole shop around, moving another one to a new location, and now, a few days more worth of counting every item we have in stock. (with an approx count of 80k items...)
Status now: done upto 550M, 550560M done, but need to do the accounting, 560600M done upto 2k 560570M sieving done 
20081230, 05:08  #183  
"Jason Goatcher"
Mar 2005
3507_{10} Posts 
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I intend to be very careful with this range and do my best(high chance of success, in my opinion) to make 4 subrange files of first prime below n=25,000 for each k in my range. I will then compress these large files, along with a list of the remaining ks and email them to the required address. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I know I promised an apology here, but I can't seem to come up with the words here. Truthfully, even though I've been rude to you in the past week, you are one of the more well mannered people on this Forum. Honestly, I somehow find the values I admire in meatspace reprehensible in cyberspace. Until I have time to think about things, of course. HAVE A GREAT DAY!!! :) 

20081230, 12:01  #184 
May 2007
Kansas; USA
3^{3}·383 Posts 
Well, Jason, you've answered my questions and I thank you. Answered, yes; satisfactorally, not really.
Despite how disrespectful I've been towards you, it's clear to me that you are not stupid...just unfocused and extremely disorganized. I've read some of your posts in other forums and you have some math skills. The problem is that if it's a difficult effort, you have to take the time to learn about it and that can require a lot of focus and a fair amount of organization by taking notes, saving links, etc. Sometimes learning about something and becoming more organized can get boring but when you're done, all of a sudden, it becomes more fun because you can do it right the first time! Unfortunately there isn't really much that you wrote here that convinces me that you can give an accurate accounting of all of the k's in 30 days. Are you really going to use PFGW to test every k to n=25000? If so, you're in trouble. The effort will take you months! You have to sieve and then run LLR or Phrot for the higher nranges. Trial factoring with the f switch in PFGW will be far too slow for such a large krange. I admit that I did just that for a k=10M range because I wanted to start it and forget it but I wouldn't dream of doing it for a k=100M range. One thing I should warn you about PFGW: If you are telling it to stop processing a k when it finds a prime for the k (which you should), if you stop PFGW in the middle, it will NOT remember the k's that it has found primes for when you restart it. This can mess you up big! For that reason, I recommend doing one k to n=25K, the next k to n=25K, and so on instead of progressing upwards by nvalue on all k's at once. If you have to restart, it's a quick change to the PFGW script to make it start at the k where it left off. I need one more thing from you: What is your current status? Let me give more detail: I think you said you were running 2 cores so... Please look in your 2 PFGW GUI windows and tell me what they say. By that I mean: 1. What k is it processing and what nvalue is it at? or 2. If it is scrolling thru the ranges too fast to see, please tell me what the last 3PRP that it found is. One of those two things will tell me just about all that I need to know. With that info., I can likely calculate a nearly exact estimated completion date for you. If you give me that last bit of info., I'll be glad to reserve it for you until Jan. 31st; a few extra days even. I'll say this: I don't believe it is possible to get there using only PFGW unless you put a lot more than 2 cores on it. Also, I may ask for that last bit of info. 12 times a week to make sure that you are progressing at a rate that would allow completion in the amount of time that you think it should. Gary 
20081230, 12:14  #185  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
10341_{10} Posts 
Quote:
Thanks for the update and nice progress on k=100M200M! Kenneth, if you can forward me your primes at this point, that would help me out. I'm trying to encourage people to post statuses more frequently on efforts where a lot of primes are being found. Having them broken up in smaller pieces allows me to not get so far behind all at once in keeping the pages updated. Without the primes, I can't reflect any nrange status updates on the pages because they would be out of sync with the primes and k's remaining. Thanks! Gary 

20081230, 12:17  #186  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
3^{3}×383 Posts 
Quote:
Micha, Thanks for the update. Can you send me your primes and k's remaining up to k=550M right now? Like I was saying to Kenneth in the last post, it helps me keep from getting too far behind on verification and udpating of the pages for efforts with a lot of primes and k's. Thanks, Gary 

20081230, 15:04  #187  
Quasi Admin Thing
May 2005
2^{2}·241 Posts 
Quote:
I can send you the primes as soon as I've the PRPs verified. Thanks for reminding me of having to send you the primes from time to time. I expect to find a total of 368 primes out of 490 possible. But in stead of yaping I should be getting to verify the PRPs. Take care everyone! Kenneth! 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Bases 101250 reservations/statuses/primes  gd_barnes  Conjectures 'R Us  896  20210415 17:04 
Bases 251500 reservations/statuses/primes  gd_barnes  Conjectures 'R Us  2277  20210415 17:03 
Bases 33100 reservations/statuses/primes  Siemelink  Conjectures 'R Us  1682  20210413 23:50 
Bases 432 reservations/statuses/primes  gd_barnes  Conjectures 'R Us  1431  20210218 16:05 
Sierp base 3 reservations/statuses/primes  gd_barnes  Conjectures 'R Us  388  20201021 19:42 