![]() |
|
|
#298 | |
|
Account Deleted
"Tim Sorbera"
Aug 2006
San Antonio, TX USA
17·251 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#299 |
|
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2
9,497 Posts |
Let's think as if we were writing the PrimeNet database (and its front-end) for the first time. The submissions (from external world) and queries (e.g. primenet_report . pl ? username ... ) will be wildly asynchronous and fairly many. So you want to keep transactions atomic: in simple words when submission "UID: Batman/batmobil_microwave, M36213629 is not prime. Res64: 9352A4330EB824__. Wd1: DB2B945D,30277304,00000000" (or put "Res64: 0000000000000000" there) comes in - there's no other transaction in hand. There's nothing else to spoil or swap. (of course it can be triggered, but it's uglier to debug and hard to maintain - you can break it when you change something else in the other corner of the code. Ugly.)
My guess is - the guts of the database are simply honest. It keeps everything plain. (It is possible to generate a random residue right at the moment of the insert transaction, but then you will have made your own life harder and either you have to set some secret flag to "1" and "0" for all others - and waste some space for an extra column, _or_ you can create a fake residue by a certain rule and you will have false positives, too, because Res64 can have any value! unless, again, there is redundancy in it, like in a credit card number. The possible digressions in these parentheses are of course infinite - we can patch and patch-a-patch, and patch again, on many levels...) My second guess is that it is the presentation layer (the script that generates summary.txt, cleared.txt, etc file) that cheats. (Remember, this is our only "window" into the database.) It runs only once an hour, so at least personally I would do it right there. If that is so, at the time of generation it has access to all the data from the last synchro (with another bigger table); or as a result of optimizations - there could be three data areas - the really big tables, the last month tables and the last hour tables. The last two would be then synchronized every hour. The first two would be merged every month. In short, I'd expect the true thing to be within the last hour (anywhere in it). Less likely, it could be anywhere in the cleared.txt but then it can be sleuthed by those who save every report. My 2 roubles. P.S. I re-read the message and it may be confusing to those who use the prime digit calculator. My apologies. It could be dumbed down more, but life is too short (and day job trumpets are calling for another meaningless battle). --Serge |
|
|
|
|
|
#300 |
|
6809 > 6502
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts
3×17×193 Posts |
![]() And the easy thing is that, when the report is run, the "Unverified Prime" flag is reported early on and ready to muddy the residues. |
|
|
|
|
|
#301 | ||||||
|
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA
22×3×641 Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
![]() Quote:
That third case wouldn't be relevant because when starting up GIMPS, George gathered up all the earlier databases of L-L residues to initialize the GIMPS database. That is, when hypothetically writing the database interface or front-end, we can safely assume that the database already has records of some previous residues from L-L tests of both composite and prime Mersennes. => BTW, keep in mind the possibility that there is a secondary database for the Mersenne primes, with more information stored about each than is stored for a composite. (A zero residue in the main database could serve as flag telling the presentation software to go to the secondary database in those cases.) This extra information could include data added after original report receipt, such as the fake residue, details of discovery and discoverer(s), news releases ... Quote:
Quote:
It'd be easier to have a secondary database for just the primes, where one could store the however-generated fake residues among other things. The report processor could spawn a prime-processing task (or call a subroutine) whenever it received a zero-residue report. That task/subroutine would initialize the new entry in the secondary database, including fake residue generation. (Also, send out the e-mail notifications ...) Quote:
Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2008-09-03 at 20:13 |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
#302 | |
|
∂2ω=0
Sep 2002
República de California
19×613 Posts |
[QUOTE=ixfd64;140686]To make sleuthing easier, I've arranged the results returned between 7:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. UTC on August 23, 2008:
Quote:
37425886 = 2 * 18712943 37946212 = 2^2 * 1237 * 7669 43096798 = 2 * 21548399 38859462 = 2 * 3^2 * 2158859 43411698 = 2 * 3^2 * 11 * 219251 36705286 = 2 * 23 * 61 * 103 * 127 42206136 = 2^3 * 3 * 7 * 29 * 8663 43112608 = 2^5 * 7 * 11 * 17497 37763178 = 2 * 3 * 6293863 40896126 = 2 * 3^2 * 599 * 3793 28829406 = 2 * 3 * 59 * 81439 42801738 = 2 * 3 * 7 * 29 * 35141 42760396 = 2^2 * 7 * 1527157 32428426 = 2 * 263 * 61651 41935240 = 2^3 * 5 * 311 * 3371 41959848 = 2^3 * 3 * 7 * 379 * 659 42781926 = 2 * 3 * 11 * 648211 42796218 = 2 * 3 * 7132703 Nothing to see here, folks, let's just keep the line moving smoothly along... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#303 |
|
Dec 2003
Hopefully Near M48
2·3·293 Posts |
In binary, the fake residue for the real M44 is 1100000100110101111000001110011000111101110. 32582657 in binary is 1111100010010110000000001. I don't see anything...
Last fiddled with by jinydu on 2008-09-04 at 01:03 |
|
|
|
|
|
#304 | |
|
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)
186916 Posts |
Quote:
Last fiddled with by mdettweiler on 2008-09-04 at 05:01 Reason: oops, little mess-up due to a [quote] tag error from ewmayer's post |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#305 |
|
Aug 2002
Ann Arbor, MI
43310 Posts |
He's looking at p-1, not p.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#306 |
|
"Nancy"
Aug 2002
Alexandria
2,467 Posts |
Some time ago we noticed that for p s.t. Mp is prime, p-1 has slightly more small prime factors than primes chosen uniformly at random from a large interval of primes. But with only 44 data points, of which the smallest ones must be excluded to avoid bias, this statistic isn't very meaningful.
Alex |
|
|
|
|
|
#307 | ||
|
Account Deleted
"Tim Sorbera"
Aug 2006
San Antonio, TX USA
17×251 Posts |
Quote:
Some from the list that catch my eye: Quote:
My guess (encrypted with my oh-so-hard encryption as usual) is B0081637. Multiple things seem to point to this: 1. 32428427, the one that had the known residue algorithm applied, was the smallest first-time LL after this guess (like my suggestion elsewhere in this thread would suggest is what it applies the known algorithm to). 2. This guess's p-1 is rather smooth (sorry if smooth is more well-defined than I'm using it, but I think my point is across, i.e. it's on the list of p-1 factors that catched my eye as having many small prime factors). 3. It's well into the 10M digit range, which from the time estimates is where I'd assume M45 is. 4. (minor note: it is a first-time LL) |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#308 |
|
Apr 2006
Down Under
89 Posts |
Now over 55% complete.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| (New ?) Wagstaff/Mersenne related property | T.Rex | Wagstaff PRP Search | 6 | 2019-11-23 22:46 |
| Holy Speedup, Batman! | R.D. Silverman | NFSNET Discussion | 4 | 2008-10-02 01:28 |
| Holy Beaverpotamus, Batman! | ewmayer | Science & Technology | 4 | 2008-03-14 19:19 |
| holy tethered cow! new Mersenne prime? (M43-related) | ixfd64 | News | 265 | 2006-01-04 09:47 |
| Mersenne prime related shirts and other items | adpowers | Lounge | 40 | 2004-08-12 22:05 |