![]() |
|
|
#430 |
|
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)
3·2,083 Posts |
Sierp. base 33 is complete to n=300K, no primes. Results are attached for 100K-300K; releasing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#431 | |
|
May 2007
Kansas; USA
28AD16 Posts |
Quote:
Just curious: How long did that take you? I'm assuming you used a full quad running a PRPnet server. With only ~1,000 tests for every n=100K range and the chance of prime falling well below 1 in 15,000 at n=300K, we may be searching this one to n=5M-10M to find the final prime as the odds of prime keep getting smaller. Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2009-10-14 at 04:45 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#432 |
|
May 2007
Kansas; USA
32·13·89 Posts |
Ian, I'm confused. You reserved base 49 and not base 48 (that I could find). But you searched base 48. Are you still going to search base 49? You stated the correct # of k's for base 49, which leads me to think you're still going to do it. One more thing: I closely checked the results file and it does appear that you searched all k's for base 48. I was somewhat surprised that there was only one prime. Let me know if anything seems out of sorts here. Gary |
|
|
|
|
|
#433 | |
|
May 2008
Wilmington, DE
22×23×31 Posts |
Quote:
I did re-check my results for Base 48 and found nothing out of the ordinary. I did have a PRPNET barf on it about halfway, but when I checked it out, the candidates file looked just fine. Nothing missing. 5975 original tests, 5713 complete. I'm assuming the rest was k359 being zapped by PRPNET. I'd chalk it up to one our infamous galactic holes. Someone doing n=40K-70K may find and bunch of the remaining. Last fiddled with by MyDogBuster on 2009-10-14 at 10:48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#434 | |
|
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)
3×2,083 Posts |
Quote:
I actually hadn't realized this was quite so low-weight. The time it took to run didn't seem too particularly strange to me at first. But now that you mention it, you're right, when I compare it to the approximate figures I remember for other bases I've done, it does seem rather surprisingly low-weight. (And that's considering that the bases I'm comparing it to are also going to be on the lower-weight side since they were also the last k or last two k's of a conjecture. )Hmm, if I'd realized it was quite this light, I would have probably sieved much higher in terms of n-range; probably to 500K rather than 300K.
Last fiddled with by mdettweiler on 2009-10-14 at 10:48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#435 | |
|
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)
3·2,083 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#436 | |
|
May 2008
Wilmington, DE
22·23·31 Posts |
Quote:
That barf on Base 48 was with the old version of PRPNET. 2.4.0 seems to have fixed that problem. Last fiddled with by MyDogBuster on 2009-10-14 at 11:01 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#437 |
|
May 2007
Kansas; USA
32·13·89 Posts |
I got a PM from Karsten on Riesel base 35. He has now searched it to n=10094 and reported the following primes for n=9230-10094:
Code:
196828 9235 115886 9292 129350 9316 155900 9318 86234 9340 257762 9340 208204 9345 239732 9372 31222 9423 248602 9425 159902 9442 131444 9452 243584 9456 255758 9474 83966 9476 117854 9520 98300 9570 203470 9579 1426 9607 92546 9614 59006 9648 97932 9654 257570 9664 228672 9666 29570 9668 109252 9683 198788 9684 167348 9692 262756 9701 181868 9708 225928 9727 83578 9731 282548 9782 40154 9784 176302 9787 205570 9803 201556 9821 240912 9849 162974 9856 114986 9908 10504 9951 67876 9965 93634 9967 143206 9981 279458 9986 81748 10001 105964 10049 181190 10078 227594 10082 193332 10089 A total of 50 primes. This makes 1155 k's remaining at n=10094. Thanks for the update Karsten. With this update, we have now accomplished an amazing feat: All Riesel bases < 39 with the exception of huge bases 3/7/15 have been searched to n>=10K! To take it a step further, Ian has already taken on the dubious task of taking Riesel base 39 up to n=10K. Conjectured at k=1352534, he has it at n=7K with no less than 6182 k's remaining! Base 40 is the next true monster conjectured at k=3386517. Past that, we have all bases 41 to 50 at n=25K. Base 51 conjectured at k=8632534 is the next one that looks extremely tough at this point.The only thing stopping us from the same on the Sierp side now is base 35. Although a very large conjecture of k=214018, it is smaller than the Riesel base 35 conjecture of k=287860. Bases 39 and 40 are also conjectured as much smaller than their Riesel counterparts. The Sierp side is much more doable to base 50/n=10K then the Riesel side since bases 35, 39, & 40 all have much smaller conjectures. I'm not advocating starting these extremely tough bases any time soon. The direction of the project is excellent right now with many different varied efforts being completed by people of all tastes. I just thought I'd mention them for future reference. From an admin standpoint, huge new bases can be a big headache. ![]() Gary Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2009-10-15 at 04:28 |
|
|
|
|
|
#438 |
|
Jan 2006
Hungary
22·67 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#439 |
|
May 2007
Kansas; USA
32·13·89 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#440 |
|
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
22×7×227 Posts |
More primes:
12056*58^35062-1 642*58^35088-1 58082*58^35515-1 20826*58^35518-1 38823*58^36929-1 56337*58^37370-1 24204*58^37967-1 90212*58^38591-1 87707*58^38783-1 61779*58^39060-1 64112*58^39243-1 They are starting to get a little thin. I need about 30 more to get under 300 for this base. I intend to stop at 50,000, which is as far as I had sieved. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Bases 6-32 reservations/statuses/primes | gd_barnes | Conjectures 'R Us | 1398 | 2021-08-06 12:49 |
| Riesel base 3 reservations/statuses/primes | KEP | Conjectures 'R Us | 1108 | 2021-08-04 18:49 |
| Bases 251-500 reservations/statuses/primes | gd_barnes | Conjectures 'R Us | 2305 | 2021-08-04 15:09 |
| Bases 501-1030 reservations/statuses/primes | KEP | Conjectures 'R Us | 3920 | 2021-08-04 14:39 |
| Bases 101-250 reservations/statuses/primes | gd_barnes | Conjectures 'R Us | 908 | 2021-08-01 07:48 |