20130831, 20:59  #1 
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA
2^{2}×3×641 Posts 
Anomaly after ECM report; possible ECM data base integrity problem
Before I recently started some ECM on M412007, I checked its Exponent Status and ECM Progress, which showed that 246 curves had been done at B1=50000, and none at any higher bound.
Though my PrimeNet assignment of M412007 specified 150 curves, I decided to reduce that to 34 in my worktodo because that's all that remained to reach the customary 280 total for curves at that B1. (Yes, I knew that the other 116 assigned curves would be just as useful, but for various reasons I cut the count to 34 anyway.) After the 34 curves were completed, I had prime95 report that result to PrimeNet. Everything appeared all right with that. Here are the relevant lines (with assignment ID omitted) from my prime.log file: Code:
Sending result to server: UID: RichBWoods/Puttputt, M412007 completed 34 ECM curves, B1=50000, B2=5000000, Wd1: 0AE0016B, AID: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx PrimeNet success code with additional info: CPU credit is 0.3587 GHzdays. Where did those 56 curves at B1=250000 in the ECM Progress report for M412007 come from??? IIRC, _if_ I had reported doing the entire 150 curves that PrimeNet assigned me, the 116 beyond the 34 needed to reach the B1=50000 standard of 280 would have been credited as a smaller number of curves at B1=250000. I understand that ... but I didn't perform those extra 116, and I didn't report those extra 116!! Could it be that PrimeNet improperly treated my report of 34 curves as though it actually was for the 150 curves assigned by PrimeNet??? That it converted the potential "extra 116" to a credit of 56 curves at B1=250000, even though I neither performed nor reported those "extra 116"??? If so, this is a problem for the integrity of recorded totals of ECM curves in the GIMPS data base. Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 20130831 at 21:13 Reason: added prime.log lines 
20130901, 01:16  #2  
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
1E55_{16} Posts 
Quote:
When you see at the top of the chart that 640 curves are required at B1=250K, that number came from GMPECM and assumes no ECM has been performed on the number. However, we have done a lot of ECM at B1=50K. In the primenet report, when a column competes, the next column is populated with the equivalent number of curves at the higher B1. In other words, the 280 curves done at B1=50K is equivalent to 56 curves at B1=250K. When I wrote the PHP code for the web page, I felt I had three options: 1) Reduce the count of required curves at the top of the column (in your case to 64056). 2) Implement the current system. 3) Start the 250K count at zero, but change it to "Done" once the 64056th curve is reported. All three options have their pitfalls. I arbitrarily chose the second option. 

20130901, 02:55  #3  
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA
2^{2}×3×641 Posts 
Quote:
Thanks for the explanation. I must not have ever looked beforeandafter at the ECM Progress report when this occurred. Quote:
(Another note for my planned grand amalgamated FAQ at the wiki.) :)    Hmm... Implication: The ECM Progress report will never show a "Done" followed by a blank space in the next column. Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 20130901 at 03:01 

20130901, 03:08  #4  
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA
2^{2}·3·641 Posts 
Quote:
And each of the later columns would also show just the adjustedforcompletionofallpreviouscolumns totals? A singletime change? What's the pitfall here? Confusing the veteran ECMers who know the GMPECM curve numbers? Wouldn't a simple headnote or footnote of explanation be sufficient for them?    (Deleted something you'd already answered) Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 20130901 at 03:38 Reason: Deleted something you'd already answered 

20130901, 03:20  #5  
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
7765_{10} Posts 
Quote:
1) People ask why the GIMPS web page required curve counts don't agree with the GMPECM required curve counts. 2) Someone starts ECMing a number from scratch and does 584 curves at 250K. This does not result in a "Done" status since 280 curves at 50K were never done. Yes, footnotes (or your grand FAQ) can address all these pitfalls. 

20130901, 03:41  #6  
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA
2^{2}·3·641 Posts 
Quote:
Quote:
Well, okay ... we're at a local maximum that suffices. Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 20130901 at 03:53 

20130901, 03:51  #7 
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
1E55_{16} Posts 
BTW, there are more "problems". In the DB, ECM effort is recorded as one float value. If you do 10 1M curves on your number, that column will remain empty but the 250K column will go up by ~40 curves.

20130901, 03:55  #8 
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA
7692_{10} Posts 
So, if I can get the rest of my life straightened out, it's still not too late for me to contribute programming?

20130901, 04:27  #9 
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
5·1,553 Posts 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Integrity check of Prime95 archive?  WaiCeeh  Software  18  20170623 14:26 
Annoying Ambient Air Anomaly Analyzed and Answered!  Xyzzy  Miscellaneous Math  3  20150906 06:47 
ecm anomaly?  swishzzz  Factoring  14  20120201 17:26 
Intel Burn Test & LL integrity  hj47  Hardware  12  20100126 11:08 
v4_computer vs. Machine Name anomaly  ADBjester  PrimeNet  5  20081112 17:07 