3 years trend - Page 6

aketilander · 2012-10-26, 05:40

Maybe its time to start collecting the information also for next range 79.3M - 596M ?

petrw1 · 2012-10-26, 20:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by aketilander

Maybe its time to start collecting the information also for next range 79.3M - 596M ?

0 to 79.3 is easy. I use George's Classic report. Your idea is a good one but a whole other jar of pickles.

Jwb52z · 2012-10-28, 00:38

Maybe I misunderstood, and I'd love someone to explain it to me if I did, but I thought I read somewhere that the Prime 95 program can't compute ranges above 79.3 million unless it were rewritten and there was new hardware available which doesn't currently exist on a wide scale.

retina · 2012-10-28, 00:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jwb52z

Maybe I misunderstood, and I'd love someone to explain it to me if I did, but I thought I read somewhere that the Prime 95 program can't compute ranges above 79.3 million unless it were rewritten and there was new hardware available which doesn't currently exist on a wide scale.

P95 has been able to do LL test up to ~596M for a long time now. It was updated "eons" ago. And no new hardware is required. Just a stock PC with ECC will do the larger numbers fine. Without ECC then your chances of a successful test without any errors is diminished somewhat.

Jwb52z · 2012-10-28, 00:43

Thank you for the quick response. I appreciate it. :)

petrw1 · 2013-11-01, 05:12

Code:

Year	Pr.#	Factored	Two LL	One LL	Unknown	Expect	P-90 Yrs	Difference	TwoLL Min	OneLL Min
1999	38	1,622,684	102,184	95,493	2,810,514	6.08	43,144,037			
2000	38	2,455,307	137,115	120,011	1,918,442	5.28	28,614,462	14,529,575		
2001	38	2,549,750	172,986	135,744	1,772,395	4.78	27,511,914	1,102,548		
2002	39	2,604,045	204,911	174,748	1,647,170	4.20	26,665,844	846,070		
2003	39	2,657,598	246,206	213,181	1,513,889	3.66	25,907,845	757,999		
2004	41	2,710,167	308,062	262,905	1,349,738	3.07	24,737,484	1,170,361		
2005	42	2,738,224	353,153	314,720	1,224,774	2.64	24,026,650	710,834	11,145,000	16,693,000
2006	43	2,768,958	412,842	348,590	1,100,479	2.27	23,131,200	895,450	14,001,400	18,000,900
2007	44	2,791,134	460,066	386,008	993,661	1.97	22,213,533	917,667	15,639,000	18,816,700
2008	46	2,819,097	489,818	426,544	895,410	1.75	21,139,962	1,073,571	17,001,269	22,512,443
2009	47	2,855,510	525,350	460,953	789,056	1.53	19,594,719	1,545,243	18,455,461	27,506,209
2010	47	2,883,917	566,903	484,395	695,654	1.34	18,003,218	1,591,501	21,065,063	31,494,937
2011	47	2,903,190	619,723	492,951	615,005	1.17	16,606,994	1,396,224	22,545,883	38,103,407
2012	47	2,924,403	665,932	512,540	527,994	1.00	14,962,525	1,644,469	25,127,951	43,715,807
2013	48	2,945,405	707,514	570,592	407,354	0.76	12,294,872	2,667,653	26,503,597	44,788,873

Bigger drop in P90 Years....I partly "blame" GPU72 :)

petrw1 · 2013-11-01, 05:19

...

Uncwilly · 2013-11-04, 06:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by petrw1

Bigger drop in P90 Years....I partly "blame" GPU72 :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by petrw1

...

If you want a bunch more data, I have ~weekly recording of all that data for the last 2 years, plus all the previous data points, not just yearly.

aketilander · 2013-11-04, 14:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by petrw1

Code:

Year    Pr.#    Expect
1999    38      6.08
2013    48      0.76

I think this is very strange / surprising. In 1999 we were expecting to find 6 Mersenne primes in this range. So far we have found 10 ... and still counting.

Is there something wrong with the estimation of number of Mersenne primes or just a normal variation?

R.D. Silverman · 2013-11-04, 15:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by aketilander

I think this is very strange / surprising. In 1999 we were expecting to find 6 Mersenne primes in this range. So far we have found 10 ... and still counting.

Is there something wrong with the estimation of number of Mersenne primes or just a normal variation?

I suggest that you look up the Poisson distribution.

davieddy · 2013-11-20, 01:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by aketilander

I think this is very strange / surprising. In 1999 we were expecting to find 6 Mersenne primes in this range. So far we have found 10 ... and still counting.

Is there something wrong with the estimation of number of Mersenne primes or just a normal variation?

Quote:

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

I suggest that you look up the Poisson distribution.

http://stattrek.com/online-calculator/poisson.aspx

2012-10-26, 05:40	#56
aketilander "Åke Tilander" Apr 2011 Sandviken, Sweden 2×283 Posts	Next range Maybe its time to start collecting the information also for next range 79.3M - 596M ?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
PSP: 10 years old!	Citrix	Prime Sierpinski Project	1	2013-11-08 07:35
PSI, mpg, GHz P4-days and P90 years	Batalov	PrimeNet	30	2008-10-03 19:10
Assignments more than 2 years old??	robo_mojo	PrimeNet	4	2008-07-23 23:32
4 years of search	SPH	Math	3	2008-06-19 11:52
Gigaflops rate greatly exceeds trend predicted 2 1/2 years ago	GP2	Data	17	2003-12-05 11:20

2012-10-28, 00:38	#58
Jwb52z Sep 2002 2×3×7×19 Posts	Maybe I misunderstood, and I'd love someone to explain it to me if I did, but I thought I read somewhere that the Prime 95 program can't compute ranges above 79.3 million unless it were rewritten and there was new hardware available which doesn't currently exist on a wide scale.

2012-10-28, 00:43	#60
Jwb52z Sep 2002 1436₈ Posts	Thank you for the quick response. I appreciate it. :)