mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > New To GIMPS? Start Here! > Information & Answers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2012-06-23, 03:13   #1
Unregistered
 

2·31·37 Posts
Default Best Work for Finding Primes

Hello,

Right now I have my computers "trial factoring to low limits" by using the "Lucas-Lehmer test." I don't know what any of that means to be quite honest but I just wanted to make sure I'm doing the right thing so I can help test a new prime! Sorry to be a bother but just making sure. Is there anything else I should be doing? Thanks!
  Reply With Quote
Old 2012-06-23, 10:08   #2
Brain
 
Brain's Avatar
 
Dec 2009
Peine, Germany

331 Posts
Default Welcome

Trial factoring (TF) is a preliminary step that eliminates possible candidates by finding small factors. Factor found = not prime.
For proving a prime you must run "first time Lucas Lehmer tests" (LL) which you seem to have demanded from Prime95. But if your PC is relatively slow PrimeNet will assign less demanding work (for example TF).
Could you add your PC's hardware?
Last but not least: Welcome to the fun world of finding primes and factors.
Brain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-06-23, 11:02   #3
Brian-E
 
Brian-E's Avatar
 
"Brian"
Jul 2007
The Netherlands

1100110000102 Posts
Default

Just to add to what Brain writes:

Trial factoring, and Lucas-Lehmer testing, are two necessary types of work. They are not the same, and there are other work types as well. You can set a work type preference if you wish on your PrimeNet account to choose what you want to do, or you can simply select the "what makes sense" option which will make PrimeNet decide what work to give you on the basis of your hardware's particular strengths plus what the project most needs at the moment.

If you want to choose your own work type, and if you want a chance of discovering a mersenne prime yourself then, as Brain says, first time LL testing is the way to go. (DC, which is doing an LL test that someone else has already done as a double check, provides a smaller chance of discovering a prime too.) An LL test will take weeks or months, though. Factoring work is faster, just as important to the project, and much more likely to give a positive result (factor found); but it will not lead to you being the discoverer of a new prime.
Brian-E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-06-23, 12:57   #4
science_man_88
 
science_man_88's Avatar
 
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville

26·131 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian-E View Post
Just to add to what Brain writes:

Trial factoring, and Lucas-Lehmer testing, are two necessary types of work. They are not the same, and there are other work types as well. You can set a work type preference if you wish on your PrimeNet account to choose what you want to do, or you can simply select the "what makes sense" option which will make PrimeNet decide what work to give you on the basis of your hardware's particular strengths plus what the project most needs at the moment.

If you want to choose your own work type, and if you want a chance of discovering a mersenne prime yourself then, as Brain says, first time LL testing is the way to go. (DC, which is doing an LL test that someone else has already done as a double check, provides a smaller chance of discovering a prime too.) An LL test will take weeks or months, though. Factoring work is faster, just as important to the project, and much more likely to give a positive result (factor found); but it will not lead to you being the discoverer of a new prime.
basically what is being pointed out here is that gimps does not do TF by LL.
science_man_88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-06-23, 16:52   #5
Unregistered
 

9,241 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by science_man_88 View Post
basically what is being pointed out here is that gimps does not do TF by LL.
Okay thank you. When I go to test -> status it says that both workers are doing Lucas-Lehmer test so from what I now understand, that's good! I have a 2.4 Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo. I think I'm good then if I'm not mistaken.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2012-06-23, 16:54   #6
Unregistered
 

157 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by science_man_88 View Post
basically what is being pointed out here is that gimps does not do TF by LL.
As well I selected the choose the work for me option since I thought it would be best.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2012-06-24, 03:47   #7
davieddy
 
davieddy's Avatar
 
"Lucan"
Dec 2006
England

2×3×13×83 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by science_man_88 View Post
basically what is being pointed out here is that gimps does not do TF by LL.
It's not GIMPS, it is what an LL test tells you:
Either the number is prime or it's composite, but
if composite gives no indication as to what the factors are.

(Although one might conjecture that the actual non-zero residue
could potentially help in finding the factors).

It is worth checking for factors below 2^73.
GIMPS typically searches up to 2^71,
because of an administrative cock-up.
davieddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-06-24, 12:29   #8
science_man_88
 
science_man_88's Avatar
 
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville

26·131 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davieddy View Post
(Although one might conjecture that the actual non-zero residue
could potentially help in finding the factors).
funny you say that because I've brought a way up before, I believe. it's just I'm almost positive it's more expensive than TF. PM me if you want details.
science_man_88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-06-24, 13:26   #9
Dubslow
Basketry That Evening!
 
Dubslow's Avatar
 
"Bunslow the Bold"
Jun 2011
40<A<43 -89<O<-88

1C3516 Posts
Default

EWMayer has explicitly said that the (full) residue can be used to effect a primality test on the cofactor after finding a first factor.
Dubslow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-06-24, 13:50   #10
science_man_88
 
science_man_88's Avatar
 
"Forget I exist"
Jul 2009
Dumbassville

26×131 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubslow View Post
EWMayer has explicitly said that the (full) residue can be used to effect a primality test on the cofactor after finding a first factor.
the first m*y+z y>0 can be used so for 2^11-1 that means (194^2-2)%(2^11-1) = 788 can be used.

788%23 = 6 =((194%23)^2-2)%23 since these equal 23 is a factor of m*y at least and in this case a factor of m.

Last fiddled with by science_man_88 on 2012-06-24 at 13:58
science_man_88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Choose your own K and work on finding a top-5000 prime! lsoule Riesel Prime Search 362 2020-07-14 08:05
Finding VERY large primes c10ck3r Information & Answers 34 2012-08-29 16:47
Finding primes using modular stacking goatboy Math 1 2007-12-07 12:30
Finding primes from 1 upwards henryzz Lounge 35 2007-10-20 03:06
Finding primes with a PowerPC rogue Lounge 4 2005-07-12 12:31

All times are UTC. The time now is 01:56.

Wed Aug 5 01:56:07 UTC 2020 up 18 days, 21:42, 1 user, load averages: 1.56, 1.45, 1.42

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.