how is this possible?

ixfd64 · 2011-03-12, 23:01

The "Recent Cleared" page shows the following entry:

Code:

curtisc              jckl-ccm33l      50520109  C        Mar 12 2011 12:40PM   0.0 107.0746  A1CA6C4AA0EB1F__

An LL test for M50520109 took "0.0" days to complete. How did this happen? I'm guessing that he started manually testing that number some time ago but didn't get it officially assigned to him until just before he finished. Thoughts?

Or maybe curtisc is really that awesome. Hmm...

markr · 2011-03-13, 04:25

The status page for 50520109 has a couple interesting features too:

Code:

Exponent  Status            Data
50520109  No factors below  2^69
          P-1               B1=815000
          Verified LL       A1CA6C4AA0EB1F66 by "curtisc" on 2011-03-12
          Verified LL       A1CA6C4AA0EB1F66 by "curtisc" on 2011-03-12
          History           no factor to 2^64 by "Derek" on 2008-08-24
          History           B1=815000 by "curtisc" on 2011-02-01
          History           A1CA6C4AA0EB1F__ by "curtisc" on 2011-03-12
          History           A1CA6C4AA0EB1F__ by "curtisc" on 2011-03-12

cheesehead · 2011-03-14, 13:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by ixfd64

The "Recent Cleared" page shows the following entry:

As you said, the 0.0 could just mean it wasn't officially assigned until it was reported.

The REAL oddity, as markr shows without remark, is the simultaneous self-doublecheck. Granted that "curtisc" represents multiple systems, but it's still unseemly. The report ought to show more detail to make it clear that the verification was independent.

markr · 2011-03-15, 03:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheesehead

The REAL oddity, as markr shows without remark, is the simultaneous self-doublecheck.

Yes, that was the most remarkable feature of the report.

The other aspect I noticed is that the PrimeNet report has no detail for TF results between 50520109 reaching 2^64 on 24/8/2008 and its current 2^69. Apparantly PrimeNet can drop the detail of some TF results to save space, but wouldn't it be more likely to drop TF-LMH or the older result for 50520109 rather than newer results?

lycorn · 2011-03-16, 10:59

The TF to 2^69 was probably done as a v4 server assignment.

2011-03-12, 23:01	#1
ixfd64 Bemusing Prompter "Danny" Dec 2002 California 5·479 Posts	how is this possible? The "Recent Cleared" page shows the following entry: Code: curtisc jckl-ccm33l 50520109 C Mar 12 2011 12:40PM 0.0 107.0746 A1CA6C4AA0EB1F__ An LL test for M50520109 took "0.0" days to complete. How did this happen? I'm guessing that he started manually testing that number some time ago but didn't get it officially assigned to him until just before he finished. Thoughts? Or maybe curtisc is really that awesome. Hmm...

2011-03-16, 10:59	#5
lycorn "GIMFS" Sep 2002 Oeiras, Portugal 3·491 Posts	The TF to 2^69 was probably done as a v4 server assignment.