20200714, 12:48  #1 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
2·3·17·59 Posts 
Reservations for x^y+y^x
This thread is to capture reservations and completed ranges per this page. There is another search for primes of this form, but that search is by decimal length not by range of x and y. Those reservations are not managed by this thread.
At this time all y have been tested for all x <= 13000. Note that y < x as we want x^y > y^x. 
20200714, 12:51  #2 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
2·3·17·59 Posts 
I will reserve all y for 13001 <= x <= 15000. I will also doublecheck from x=12501 to x = 13000.
I will do all I can to avoid stepping on the toes of the other search for primes of this form less than 100,000 decimal digits. If anything I will be doublechecking their work. They will likely complete their search before I start testing the range they are working on. Last fiddled with by rogue on 20200714 at 12:56 
20200714, 17:59  #3 
Sep 2010
Weston, Ontario
2·7·13 Posts 
The largest x^y+y^x occurs for y=x which for a given xrange occurs for the largest x in that range. Thus, the largest Leyland number up to x=13000 is 2*13000^13000, which has 53482 decimal digits. Here is a table of Leyland number decimal digits for largest x from 13000 to 30000 at intervals of 1000:
13000 53482 14000 58047 15000 62642 16000 67267 17000 71918 18000 76596 19000 81297 20000 86021 21000 90767 22000 95534 23000 100321 24000 105126 25000 109949 26000 114790 27000 119648 28000 124521 29000 129410 30000 134314 This will give you an idea of where the overlap between the two systems lies. Having checked all Leyland numbers smaller than (currently) 84734 decimal digits implies (barring errors) that I have checked all x smaller than 19728. That allows me to suggest that this table of x, y values (based on Andrey Kulsha's ordering) is complete. Of course it would be nice to have verification. 
20200714, 18:41  #4  
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
2·3·17·59 Posts 
Quote:
If doublechecking reveals no missed primes, then I might forego doublechecking for larger x. 

20200806, 15:16  #5 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
13602_{8} Posts 
I've decided to take the doublecheck to x=30000. This will cover y<x for all of t those x. This could be about 6 months of work, but I don't know for certain yet because I need to do a lot of sieving.
To help me with that, I have made changes to xyyxsieve (code is committed, but exe is not on sourceforge yet) to reduce the memory usage of the program. In the previous version, a range of 1000 x can take 8 GB of memory (ouch). The changes have reduced that memory requirement by a factor of 10. Another good result of that change is a boost in speed by about 30%. 
20200810, 12:57  #6 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
1782_{16} Posts 
I have doublechecked up to x=13000. All is good.
Sieving for x > 15000 is going much slower than anticipated. With the updates to xyyxsieve, I probably undersieved x <= 15000 by a fair amount. As soon as I finish off other PRP testing I can put more cores against the sieving. 
20200823, 18:11  #7 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
2·3·17·59 Posts 
I found a bug in xyyxsieve that causes it to remove + terms when p divides the  term. This means weeks of sieving is lost. Fortunately it only means that I need to retest any terms accidentally removed for x < 14000, but I still need to resieve just to find out what I didn't test that should have been tested. On the plus side this only impacts me as the build with this bug is not in the latest distribution of mtsieve.
The bug was introduced when I changed xyyxsieve to support only + or , but not both concurrently as the older versions support that. 
20200825, 17:13  #8  
Sep 2010
Weston, Ontario
2·7·13 Posts 
Quote:


20200825, 21:05  #9  
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
13602_{8} Posts 
Quote:


20200826, 00:47  #10 
Sep 2010
Weston, Ontario
2·7·13 Posts 
20200812 22:17:06: Sieve started: 3 < p < 5e9 with 7448612 terms (29963 <= x <= 453605, 2 <= y <= 30453) (expecting 7082193 factors). I am currently at p=418504277 with 7114884 factors found.

20200826, 02:37  #11  
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
2·3·17·59 Posts 
Quote:
Note that I am sieving all y < 40000 for x <= 40000. Also note that it crashes upon shutdown, but that is only after it has written the output file and closed it. I haven't dug into the cause yet. I suspect I'm freeing memory that has not been allocated. Last fiddled with by rogue on 20200826 at 02:40 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Reservations  ET_  Operazione Doppi Mersennes  493  20201119 17:36 
Reservations for b^(k*2^n); b = 3, k<750  lukerichards  And now for something completely different  13  20190511 23:27 
Reservations  kar_bon  Riesel Prime Data Collecting (k*2^n1)  129  20160905 09:23 
Reservations?  R.D. Silverman  NFS@Home  15  20151129 23:18 
45M Reservations  paulunderwood  3*2^n1 Search  15  20080608 03:29 