mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Extra Stuff > Miscellaneous Math

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2021-08-16, 19:38   #232
tuckerkao
 
"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020
Head Base M168202123

22×3×47 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viliam Furik View Post
There is an output from the mfaktc program, you know? You just copy-paste it...
I don't know whether running mfaktc while playing the hard core video game will cause the program to miss a factor or not. I typically only open the internet browser or/and do other simple tasks during the meantime.

It took around 4~5 hours to TF from 2^78 to 2^79 for M168202123 on 3070 Ti. What's the highest bit that your GPU can complete the TF for this exponent and finish within 24 hours?

If I buy a new PC, I want its GPU to finish up 2^81 to 2^82 less than a full day.

Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 2021-08-16 at 19:55
tuckerkao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-08-16, 19:55   #233
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

5·7·172 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuckerkao View Post
It took around 4~5 hours to TF from 2^78 to 2^79 for M168202123 on 3070 Ti.
According to mersenne.ca only 78 bits is recommended for the 160-170 range. So, during that time you could have done another exponent from null to 78 bits. It is better to take all the exponents in a desired range to the recommended bit level before taking any beyond that level. You will find an appropriate number of factors and get the biggest bang for your money. Also, doing so will allow any newer hardware do more of the heavy lifting. This is part of the strategy that has been employed in some other ranges.
Uncwilly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-08-16, 20:03   #234
tuckerkao
 
"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020
Head Base M168202123

22×3×47 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncwilly View Post
According to mersenne.ca only 78 bits is recommended for the 160-170 range.
The recommended TF bit will rise to at least 2^81 for the exponents above M333M, I want the new GPU be able to do that on the daily basis, also the new CPU be able to finish P-1 before the last bit once per day.

If I get a chance to temporarily operate someone else's hardware, I'll hop on the bits higher than what my current PC be able to finish efficiently, otherwise I just use my current old PC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuckerkao View Post
Only 109 days remain until AMD Threadripper 5970X launches, so I'll patiently wait for that, then I'll have the computing powers I need at latest by mid-Jan 2022.


If these are the highly composite grounds,

Z48,622,147 <- M168753223
Z48,62Ӿ,127 <- M168767023
Z48,65Ӿ,897 <- M168830323
Z48,673,Ɛ8Ɛ <- M168860123
Z48,6Ӿ6,20Ɛ <- M168926123

then the highly primitive ground should be at Z48,3Ɛ7,237 <- M168202123

I'll try do it all myself, see if I'm correct this time.
I surely picked a much more primitive exponent using this dozenal strategy, only wanted to fuel in more motives, so I could finish up more.

Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 2021-08-16 at 20:14
tuckerkao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-08-16, 20:14   #235
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

1011510 Posts
Default

As is so often the case, you did not even address what I said. You quoted it, then went off on a tangent.
Uncwilly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-08-16, 20:21   #236
tuckerkao
 
"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020
Head Base M168202123

22·3·47 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncwilly View Post
As is so often the case, you did not even address what I said. You quoted it, then went off on a tangent.
I've finished up to only 2^78 for many M168M exponents including M168412723 and M168424723, have no plans to go further. I thought it was fun to stack up a skyscraper like Drkirkby's M105211111 on only 1 exponent and called it as his primary representation, then he started to be able to test only the Cat 4 exponents. Chalsall landed on that and paid a huge rent for it.

I generally don't run TFs beyond the recommendation levels, only ViliamF enjoys doing that and tells me finding more factors will be really impressive, see example M103332391.

M120202123 reached the desired bit few minutes ago, how long will it take for someone to be willing to run a PRP of it? The supplies seem to be always way higher than the demands on the exponents I like.

Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 2021-08-16 at 20:43
tuckerkao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-08-16, 22:50   #237
Viliam Furik
 
Viliam Furik's Avatar
 
"Viliam Furík"
Jul 2018
Martin, Slovakia

70610 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuckerkao View Post
I generally don't run TFs beyond the recommendation levels, only ViliamF enjoys doing that and tells me finding more factors will be really impressive, see example M103332391.
I think that was to factor that specific exponent.
Viliam Furik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-08-18, 06:59   #238
tuckerkao
 
"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020
Head Base M168202123

22×3×47 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncwilly View Post
It is better to take all the exponents in a desired range to the recommended bit level before taking any beyond that level.
I take the precaution that before I formally claim M168202123 as my Headquarter or Center of Operation, I factor it up a bit more, so ViliamF won't come back and topple it by finding a possible factor that I may barely miss myself, then laugh endlessly to a heart attack. M168202123 seems to be very factor-resistant, has already passed the stage 1 of P+1 factoring(see screenshot below).

My theme has been consistent during the recent days: Search M168,***,*23 starting year 2021, so M168202123 will be a logical location for me to establish my primary asset. The professional Mersenne Prime search operation is indeed many years long, thus an excellent starting location is a must-have, call it a place of rest and hopefully a billionaire like Ben Delo will tour my avenue someday later this year.

It's easier for me to own my unique range and a central area with lots of missions and/or tasks accomplished. Search of Mersenne Prime will be somehow more convenient. I'm used to the way that there's a "Town Hall" in the "Forge of Empires" or "Kingdom Reborn". The random seeds of the map generator contain 9 numerical digits, thus perfect to type the Mersenne exponents in. "Command Center" is typically the very first building available to the players in the Skirmish game in the Command & Conquer series. Since there are tons of available exponents in the higher ranges, every Mersenne user will be able to find his/her own desired region(s) to settle down.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viliam Furik View Post
Stop it or I'll get a heart attack from laughing too hard... Even though I'm 18. (that is a bad joke, don't take it seriously)

If you somehow get a P-PRP result, "GIMPS prime discovery protocols" will come into action and a bunch of undisclosed trusted individuals will be tasked with running an LL test to verify the discovery.
According to the numerical arrangements in the dozenal base, M168202123 should survive the trial factoring up to the 2^82, but I still need the real decimal evidence that it's true. The only way is to borrow the Geforce 3070 Ti of 1 of my friends on certain Sundays. It'll be the best if the property value of my headquarter eventually worth more than Drkirkby's M105211111.

I enjoy to play Monopoly with my friends, owning an entire row of properties is a good way to win the championship. With the Mersenne numbers, owning a chain of exponents of M168,202,*** will show the works that I have done in a clearer manner.

If the trial factoring of the Mersenne exponents can display the possible tasks into several categories with the enhanced levels of the gaming graphics such as tech trees -> "2^73 to 2^74", "2^74 to 2^75", "2^75 to 2^76", "P-1 with the recommended bounds", grayed-out choices indicate that the prerequisite haven't been fulfilled yet but the Mersenne users can still perform them.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Mersenne - P Plus 1 for M168202123.png
Views:	22
Size:	62.2 KB
ID:	25485  

Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 2021-08-18 at 07:47
tuckerkao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-08-18, 12:28   #239
jnml
 
Feb 2012
Prague, Czech Republ

18510 Posts
Default

More than once you're talking about some kind of ownership of some set of numbers.

I don't understand. What concept are you talking about?
jnml is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-08-18, 14:24   #240
drkirkby
 
"David Kirkby"
Jan 2021
Althorne, Essex, UK

26×7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuckerkao View Post
Drkirkby built a skyscraper on M105211111, but many of the surrounding properties were already owned by Ben Delo, thus Drkirkby will have to find another area in the upcoming months. He picked this exponent probably because of the repunit digits pattern from the right-end, so it's easier to remember and he can come back to visit this place often.
I don't know what "built a skyscraper" was supposed to mean. All I wanted to do was benchmark testing exponents on my computer, using different amounts of RAM (8, 16 , 32, 64, 128, 256 and 320 GB), and different amounts of "saved tests" (1.0, 1.05 and 2) then see what gave the maximum performance, based on maximising the equation:

probably_of_finding_a_factor_using_P-1 * time_for_PRP_test - time_for_P-1_factoring

I preferred to do it on the same exponent, so I knew any changes in time were not due to change of exponent. No "surrounding properties were already owned by Ben Delo" Many people, including Ben and myself were working around 105 million, as it is the most sensible place to look.

If you want to find a prime number, there seems to me only two sensible places worth consideration.

  1. The smallest exponents you can get, that have not had a LL or PRP test, as those have both the highest probability of being producing a Mersenne prime, and also take the shortest period of time to test.
  2. Exponents somewhat over 332,000,000 which will yield at least 100,000,000 decimal digits, so nett one $50,000. Having tested one of them, M332646233, I concluded it was too much work. But at least I can see a point in why people do that.
Your testing exponents around 168 million has several disadvantages.
  1. If the Mersenne number happens to be prime, the number of decimal digits is insufficient to get you the $50,000 prize. All you will get is $3,000.
  2. The exponent is unlikely to be trial-factored sufficiently high, so you need to do the trial-factoring, so it takes extra time.
  3. The exponent is unlikely to have any P-1 factoring, so you need to do that, so it takes extra time.
  4. The exponent is less likely to yield a Mersenne prime than an exponent around 105.5 million, as it's generally believed the spacing between Mersenne primes increases with the exponent.
  5. The exponent is going to take around (168/105.5)2.1=2.54x as long to test
To me at least, there's no reason to test around 168 million now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuckerkao View Post
I've finished up to only 2^78 for many M168M exponents including M168412723 and M168424723, have no plans to go further. I thought it was fun to stack up a skyscraper like Drkirkby's M105211111 on only 1 exponent and called it as his primary representation, then he started to be able to test only the Cat 4 exponents. Chalsall landed on that and paid a huge rent for it.
I never called it my "primary representation". I have never come across such a term. Please, if you are going to write "drkirkby said xyz...", make sure I actually wrote it - POST A LINK. You seem to be inventing things you believe I wrote, when I never wrote them at all. You also seem to think you can read my mind, but you are not doing so.

There are one of 3 possible reasons I starting getting category 4 exponents, and none have anything to do with chalsall, nor my category 4 issue had any impact on chalsall.
drkirkby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-08-18, 14:47   #241
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

5×7×172 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by drkirkby View Post
  1. The smallest exponents you can get, that have not had a LL or PRP test, as those have both the highest probability of being producing a Mersenne prime, and also take the shortest period of time to test.
A minor quibble. exponents in the 105M range vs the 110M or 115M range have basically no difference in probability of being a prime. While one might be able to calculate a theoretical difference, the difference is too slight to have a practical consideration, and so far the primes are so scattered and random that we have little real clue when one might be 'due'.
Quote:
Your testing exponents around 168 million has several disadvantages.
His kit, his joy.
Uncwilly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-08-18, 15:11   #242
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

2×2,591 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncwilly View Post
A minor quibble. exponents in the 105M range vs the 110M or 115M range have basically no difference in probability of being a prime.
For the same amount of TF/P-1 done, a 105M exponent has a roughly 10% higher (a priori) probability of being prime compared to a 115M exponent. Just sayin'.
EDIT:-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncwilly View Post
His kit, his joy.
Looks at thread title

Last fiddled with by axn on 2021-08-18 at 15:12
axn is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Automatic fetch of Trial Factoring work for GPU mfakt* LaurV GPU to 72 81 2020-12-02 05:17
Simple Script to get Trial Factoring Work jfamestad PrimeNet 3 2016-11-06 20:32
Why trial factoring work chopped into chunks? lidocorc PrimeNet 4 2008-11-06 18:48
How does the trial factoring work with 15K*2^n-1 jocelynl 15k Search 0 2003-07-11 14:23
How does trial-factoring work? ThomRuley Software 5 2003-05-30 20:34

All times are UTC. The time now is 11:06.


Thu Dec 2 11:06:40 UTC 2021 up 132 days, 5:35, 0 users, load averages: 1.20, 1.26, 1.28

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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.