mersenneforum.org > Data Help doing some quadrup1e+ checks
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2015-03-13, 20:19 #1 Madpoo Serpentine Vermin Jar     Jul 2014 22·3·277 Posts Help doing some quadrup1e+ checks I've been trawling through the data and testing some exponents that have failed to get a pair of matching residues after several different tests. It's been going well and I've knocked out quite a few of these where 3 or more tests failed to produce a successful double-check. But now I'm at a point where I still have 2 for now where my test managed to add yet another unmatched residue. Rather than do another double-check of my own (from a different machine), I wondered if any of you would be able to help me test a couple. If you do, just reply here and let people know you're doing it. I'll be curious to know if my runs matched... so far I haven't had problems. 38419327 47540719 By the way, on that first one, you'll see a pair of residues that actually do match, but they're not counted because they had the same shift count... it had something to do with how the v4 data was migrated to v5 back when, I guess.
 2015-03-13, 21:46 #2 bloodIce     Feb 2010 Sweden 101011012 Posts Could we try to factor such cases, or that is not according to the rules of the game?
2015-03-13, 22:13   #3
Serpentine Vermin Jar

Jul 2014

22·3·277 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by bloodIce Could we try to factor such cases, or that is not according to the rules of the game?
Hey, whatever floats your boat. :) A factor is as good (or better) than a confirmed LL test.

FYI, I just realized that first one seems to be assigned to someone currently (it wasn't when I ran my test but I guess it got assigned between then and when I checked the result in today).

 2015-03-13, 22:26 #4 manfred4     Mar 2014 Germany 23·3·5 Posts I am currently factoring the second candidate - I will tell you here when that job is finished. Edit: no Factor to 2^72 - feel free to do an LL test whoever wants Last fiddled with by manfred4 on 2015-03-13 at 23:25
 2015-03-14, 06:50 #5 VictordeHolland     "Victor de Hollander" Aug 2011 the Netherlands 23×3×72 Posts M38419327 factor Code: [Sat Mar 14 03:07:43 2015] UID: VictordeHollander/PCVICTOR, M38419327 has a factor: 5527974754269440440249 [TF:72:73:mfakto 0.14-Win cl_barrett15_73_gs_2]
2015-03-14, 08:49   #6
Serpentine Vermin Jar

Jul 2014

22×3×277 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by VictordeHolland Code: [Sat Mar 14 03:07:43 2015] UID: VictordeHollander/PCVICTOR, M38419327 has a factor: 5527974754269440440249 [TF:72:73:mfakto 0.14-Win cl_barrett15_73_gs_2]
Awesome...works for me. And thanks for doing that.

I might have access to some nice multicore servers, but I don't have any GPUs to do fast factoring so it never crossed my mind to try that approach on these tricky ones before doing a full LL test.

Last fiddled with by Madpoo on 2015-03-14 at 08:50

 2015-03-14, 09:31 #7 guido72     Aug 2002 Rovereto (Italy) 3×53 Posts I'd be glad to do a n-chek on the second exp.. It will take 4/5 days roughly... But, as you pointed out, it's already assigned to "Sergey Nosov"... I'll do it, but want to be fair, so... Waitin' for a hint. Regards
2015-03-14, 12:45   #8
Brian-E

"Brian"
Jul 2007
The Netherlands

2·3·5·109 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by guido72 I'd be glad to do a n-chek on the second exp.. It will take 4/5 days roughly... But, as you pointed out, it's already assigned to "Sergey Nosov"... I'll do it, but want to be fair, so... Waitin' for a hint. Regards
Unless you are able to contact Sergey Nosov and arrange things, I don't think you can ethically do that work (unless and until the assignment completes or expires).

 2015-03-14, 13:11 #9 lycorn     "GIMFS" Sep 2002 Oeiras, Portugal 3·509 Posts +1.
2015-03-14, 14:27   #10
bloodIce

Feb 2010
Sweden

17310 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by guido72 I'd be glad to do a n-chek on the second exp.. It will take 4/5 days roughly... But, as you pointed out, it's already assigned to "Sergey Nosov"... I'll do it, but want to be fair, so... Waitin' for a hint. Regards
I would not do this if I were you. I lost many hours of TF-work on 47540719. Straight after I asked my question I put the number for TF, but before I woke up, "my work" was reported already to the server. Now, exponent 47540719 is among the most wanted factored and I assume we will have factor soon. This will make your work pointless. Of course, if we do not manage to factor it, a matching LL-residue is needed, but it is already assigned to "Sergey Nosov", who might be ahead of you.

@Madpoo: I would suggest that you give us a list of such problematic exponents. I think that the most of them can be factored in reasonable time. 38419327 was easier to factor, than to verify by LL-test. How many suspected cases you have?

2015-03-14, 15:32   #11
ATH
Einyen

Dec 2003
Denmark

62718 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Madpoo I've been trawling through the data and testing some exponents that have failed to get a pair of matching residues after several different tests.
Since you are interested in triplechecking, did you see my old thread regarding the subject?

Back then no one was interested or seemed to think it was important, so I stopped checking at 20M. Post #13 has the remaining numbers I planned to work on up to 25M divided into 3 categories.

I was concerned with results where both initial LL and double check was run by the same user and specifically those on the same computer. Maybe you can check in the database that they were actually run with different shift counts and they are ok, but I still feel different users/computers should double check.

Last fiddled with by ATH on 2015-03-14 at 16:06

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post casmith789 PrimeNet 7 2015-05-26 00:53 DW52 PrimeNet 7 2011-04-07 04:47 Rastus Data 1 2003-12-19 18:20 outlnder Lounge 4 2003-04-07 18:06 BigRed Software 1 2002-10-20 05:29

All times are UTC. The time now is 05:17.

Thu Jan 27 05:17:34 UTC 2022 up 187 days, 23:46, 1 user, load averages: 2.08, 2.16, 1.98