mersenneforum.org

mersenneforum.org (https://www.mersenneforum.org/index.php)
-   Conjectures 'R Us (https://www.mersenneforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=81)
-   -   Riesel base 3 reservations/statuses/primes (https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=11151)

KEP 2008-04-17 15:31

Riesel base 3 reservations/statuses/primes
 
Completed and in process reservations for Riesel base 3 posted from the previous "Riesel base 3 attack" subforum":

[code]
k-range n-range status
4M-2.147G [B]500K-1M [/B] completed by BOINC
4M-2.147G [B]1M-1.07M [/B]in progress by BOINC
4M-10M [B]100K-500K[/B] completed by henryzz
10M-20M [B]100K-425K[/B] completed by henryzz
10M-20M [B]425K-500K[/B] completed by Puzzle-Peter
20M-6G [B]100K-500K[/B] completed by BOINC
6G-10G [B]100K-250K[/B] completed by BOINC
>63G [B]100K-500K[/B] completed by MisterBitcoin

<100M [B]25K-100K [/B]completed by mini-drive I
100M-200M [B]25K-100K [/B]completed by KEP
200M-250M [B]25K-100K [/B]completed by Mattyp101
250M-500M [B]25K-100K [/B]completed by grueny
500M-2G [B]25K-30K [/B]completed by VBCurtis
500M-2G [B]30K-100K [/B]completed by Lennart
2G-2.05G [B]25K-100K [/B]completed by VBCurtis
2.05G-2.5G [B]25K-100K [/B]completed by Puzzle-Peter
2.5G-8G [B]25K-100K [/B]completed by Lennart
8G-21G [B]25K-100K[/B] completed by KEP
21G-22G [B]25K-100K[/B] completed by Puzzle-Peter
22G-23G [B]25K-50K [/B] completed by Siemelink
22G-23G [B]50K-100K[/B] completed by BOINC
23G-25G [B]25K-100K[/B] completed by Puzzle-Peter
25G-60G [B]25K-50K[/B] completed by rogue
25G-35G [B]50K-100K[/B] completed by BOINC
35G-45G [B]50K-100K[/B] completed by rogue
45G-46G [B]50K-100K[/B] completed by pokemonlover123
46G-60G [B]50K-100K[/B] completed by rogue
60G-63G [B]25K-100K[/B] completed by VBCurtis
>63G [B]25K-100K[/B] completed by MyDogBuster

<500M [B]25K[/B] completed by KEP
500M-510M [B]25K[/B] completed by michaf
510M-520M [B]25K [/B] completed by Flatlander
520M-570M [B]25K[/B] completed by michaf
570M-580M [B]25K[/B] completed by Mini-Geek
580M-600M [B]25K [/B]completed by KEP
600M-650M [B]25K [/B] completed by Flatlander
650M-660M [B]25K[/B] completed by henryzz
660M-700M [B]25K[/B] completed by Flatlander
700M-800M [B]25K[/B] completed by gd_barnes
800M-810M [B]25K[/B] completed by Mini-Geek
810M-820M [B]25K[/B] completed by gd_barnes
820M-830M [B]25K[/B] completed by henryzz
830M-2G [B]25K[/B] completed by Puzzle-Peter
2G-2.05G [B]25K [/B]completed by VBCurtis
2.05G-2.5G [B]25K[/B] completed by gd_barnes
2.5G-3G [B]25K[/B] completed by Lennart
3G-11G [B]25K[/B] completed by Puzzle-Peter
11G-12G [B]25K[/B] completed by KEP
12G-13G [B]25K[/B] completed by Puzzle-Peter
13G-14G [B]25K[/B] completed by KEP
14G-15G [B]25K[/B] completed by Puzzle-Peter
15G-60G [B]25K[/B] completed by KEP
60G-63G [B]25K[/B] completed by rogue
>63G [B]25K[/B] completed by KEP
[/code][B]Admin edit: Separated Riesel base 3 reservations/statuses/primes posts from Sierp base 3 reservations/status/primes posts.[/B]

[quote=gd_barnes;131492]
KEP, is the above what you are doing or are you doing any sieving beforehand? If so, what is it that you are using to sieve? IMHO, no sieving is needed at all below n=10K. A case could be made for sieving above n=10K but I prefer to just let PFGW run to n=25K without sieving.


Gary[/quote]

It exactly is what I'm doing. Well to avoid any confusion here is my battle plan (Using WinPFGW):

1. test 2,500,000 equal k's for being PrP up to n=25,000 (command-line: "input.txt -lxxM.txt")
2. Verify those PrP (command-line: "pfgw.log -tc")
3. List all those k's remaining, and make them publicly availeable on my google page

Hope that explained, but the short answer to your question Gary is: Yes that was exactly what I am doing regards my attack on the Base3 riesel.

Now I've a question. Is there anyway to make WinPFGW work a list of k's from e.g. n=25,001 to n=100,000?

Also to the developers of WinPFGW, it would be very nice if you could make a way to avoid save a log file with factors and such stuff, and make a way to save only the Primes, the PrP and k or n remaining. I think that such a k or n function should be asked to save only for every 10 % which in my example would mean at n:

2,500
5,000
7,500
10,000
12,500
15,000
17,500
20,000
22,500
25,000

That way a lot of storage (and writing time) will be saved and it will be easier to list the k's missing and compare the number to the amount of primes found :)

Thanks everyone and happy holidays.

Regards

KEP

KEP 2008-04-17 17:50

Everyone interested can follow the progress in the Riesel Base 3 conjecture attack on following site: (none)

Expect it to be updated no more than in the weekends or extended weekends, so in case of vacation it can be more than a week or 2 or 3 weeks before I gets to update the latest progress. Thanks for understanding. I know by the way that the webpage is crap, but I doesn't have much experience using google pages yet, and does it really matter ;), there is the most nescessary to follow the progress.

Take care everyone!

gd_barnes 2008-04-19 05:28

[quote=KEP;131785]
Now I've a question. Is there anyway to make WinPFGW work a list of k's from e.g. n=25,001 to n=100,000?Regards

KEP[/quote]


Yes, you would just tell it to do so in your script. But doing so would be very inefficient. Sieving should be done first for n-values that are so high. After sieving, you could then use LLR or PFGW (or Phrot) to do primality testing.


Gary

gd_barnes 2008-04-19 06:11

On April 13th, I got an Email from KEP listing the primes for Riesel base 3 up to k=100K. ZERO k's were remaining. The reservation update and 10 highest primes are shown on the web pages.


Gary

KEP 2008-04-25 21:43

The Riesel base 3 is tested up to k=2M and n=25k. There is a 12 remaining k's and the ranges up to 100M is in progress at once. I found that taking the k to only n=5,000 and then do sieve of the remaining k's is much more efficient (about 90% faster). Is anyony by the way knowing of a great way to sieve many different k values from n=5,001 to n=25,000? I used to use NewPGen, but it requires a great deal of manual work to prepare the sieve files. Once the sieve files is prepared Sr1sieve can be used, using a .bat file and then sieveing will be rather easy, but anyone with a great idea to speedup and reduce the amont of manual work, please consider replying to me :)

On other notice to gary: I'm not working on the base 12 k=404 (sierpinski) since it appears that my reservation did not come through, and also I feel like wanting to do more somewhere else e.g. Base 3 Riesel Conjecture :)

mdettweiler 2008-04-26 01:50

[quote=KEP;132191]The Riesel base 3 is tested up to k=2M and n=25k. There is a 12 remaining k's and the ranges up to 100M is in progress at once. I found that taking the k to only n=5,000 and then do sieve of the remaining k's is much more efficient (about 90% faster). Is anyony by the way knowing of a great way to sieve many different k values from n=5,001 to n=25,000? I used to use NewPGen, but it requires a great deal of manual work to prepare the sieve files. Once the sieve files is prepared Sr1sieve can be used, using a .bat file and then sieveing will be rather easy, but anyone with a great idea to speedup and reduce the amont of manual work, please consider replying to me :)

On other notice to gary: I'm not working on the base 12 k=404 (sierpinski) since it appears that my reservation did not come through, and also I feel like wanting to do more somewhere else e.g. Base 3 Riesel Conjecture :)[/quote]
Use srsieve to start the sieving (it can accept a file with a list of k's as input--just enter one expression, such as 123*3^n-1, per line), then when you've reached about p=0.5G or so, switch to sr2sieve. :smile: It's much faster, and easier, than using NewPGen/sr1sieve for each individual k.

As for your base 12 k=404 reservation not going through, Gary is on vacation so though he can get on mersenneforum a couple times a day, he can't update any of the web pages. So, even though it's not marked on the page yet, your reservation is still OK--though if you don't want to search it after all that's fine too. :smile:

KEP 2008-04-26 05:47

[quote=Anonymous;132200]Use srsieve to start the sieving (it can accept a file with a list of k's as input--just enter one expression, such as 123*3^n-1, per line), then when you've reached about p=0.5G or so, switch to sr2sieve. :smile: It's much faster, and easier, than using NewPGen/sr1sieve for each individual k.

As for your base 12 k=404 reservation not going through, Gary is on vacation so though he can get on mersenneforum a couple times a day, he can't update any of the web pages. So, even though it's not marked on the page yet, your reservation is still OK--though if you don't want to search it after all that's fine too. :smile:[/quote]

Thanks for your tips, but in your srsieve example, I can see that there is an option to choose a min and max n aswell as the other usefull options known from sr1sieve. Now 2 questions, can I sieve from p1 using srsieve? and can I switch directly from srsieve to sr2sieve without having to do anything or changing the file(s)?

About the base 12 attack, I feel like its better to release it, since I've a lot of testing to do to find the most efficient way to attack the base3 problem. And about Gart being on vacation (hope that I was Gary now) I didn't know that, so thanks for telling me. So to sum up, I'm releasing the Base 12 sierpinski range for others to work on, and will now only consider to find the most efficient way to attack the base 3 riesel conjecture. The most efficient way seems to be as follows:

1. Use WinPFGW to n=2,500
2. Use srsieve from n=2,501 to n=25,000
3. To start out by testing the lowest k. If it fails to prime, then move all k's that somewhere is the product of 3 of tested k, which has no n value higher than n=25,000-(the times that k has been multiplied by 3). Doing this requires some manual work, but saves up to 8 hours LLR testing per k :)

If you have any questions about this please feel free to ask them or if you feels like joining the war please consider help :)

Go to to this page: (none) to check the progress and what I'm up to with this base. On this page you can also see what battleplans (I know dont lay out your plans in the open for your enemy to see) on how to combat this k the fastest :)

Thank you and take care!

KEP

tnerual 2008-04-26 05:52

with large number of k (>300), forget about sr2sieve ! only use srsieve

i have 2000k left in my base 31 file and i can't use sr2 sieve (after 300k, i'm at 1.5 GB of memory used) the problem is the legendre symbol table that is too big ...

KEP 2008-04-26 06:33

[QUOTE=tnerual;132209]with large number of k (>300), forget about sr2sieve ! only use srsieve

i have 2000k left in my base 31 file and i can't use sr2 sieve (after 300k, i'm at 1.5 GB of memory used) the problem is the legendre symbol table that is too big ...[/QUOTE]

2 things.

1. Maybe you can PM me how you got started using srsieve, since I don't seem to be able to get it started. So would you be kind enough to tell me how you got started?... you doesn't have to PM me you can also tell me here :)

2. Also can't sr2sieve be told not to build the legendre table if it seems to take up all the memory?

Now about my first question to Mr a :), I found the answer myself, and I'm assuming that I should be able to go directly to sr2sieve.exe, if this is wrong please correct me.

mdettweiler 2008-04-26 06:56

[quote=tnerual;132209]with large number of k (>300), forget about sr2sieve ! only use srsieve

i have 2000k left in my base 31 file and i can't use sr2 sieve (after 300k, i'm at 1.5 GB of memory used) the problem is the legendre symbol table that is too big ...[/quote]
With the recent updates to sr2sieve, though, it's now faster even for lots of k's. For example, in the NPLB doublecheck team-sieve (with 500 k's) that I ran a while back, we found that sr2sieve was faster.

Of course, though, as you said, if you have too many k's in the sieve, memory usage becomes a problem. In that case, of course, srsieve is your only option.
[quote=KEP;132210]2 things.

1. Maybe you can PM me how you got started using srsieve, since I don't seem to be able to get it started. So would you be kind enough to tell me how you got started?... you doesn't have to PM me you can also tell me here :)

2. Also can't sr2sieve be told not to build the legendre table if it seems to take up all the memory?

Now about my first question to Mr a :), I found the answer myself, and I'm assuming that I should be able to go directly to sr2sieve.exe, if this is wrong please correct me.[/quote]
Okay, here's what you have to do:

1) In your srsieve folder, make a new text file called "equations.txt" or something along those lines. Open it in a text editor, and list each k you want in the sieve on its own line, like this:
[code]100*3^n-1
200*3^n-1
300*3^n-1[/code]and et cetera, for all the k's in your sieve. Save the file and close it.

2) Make another text file in your srsieve folder, named "run_srsieve.bat" or something like that. Open it and type the following line, substituting various values where specified:
[code]srsieve -m 4e9 -n [I]lower end of n-range[/I] -N [I]upper end of n-range[/I] equations.txt[/code]Save the file, and close it.

3) Double-click on run_srsieve.bat, and you'll see a DOS window pop up, wherein srsieve displays its output. It outputs status reports every minute; below 4G it won't display factors found, but once it gets past 4G it will show every factor found on screen. (Earlier on in the sieve you'll want to minimize the window when you're not watching it, so the computer won't waste CPU time trying to display the factors on screen.) To interrupt srsieve press Ctrl-C, and the DOS window will close.

4) If you interrupt srsieve, it will generate a file called srsieve.out (it also generates this file for backup purposes every 60 minutes even if you don't interrupt it). Rename this to something else, so that it won't write on top of it when you continue the sieve. (I usually name my partially-sieved files based on the date--for example, "Apr26-1.txt" if it's the first file I saved on April 26.) Then, when you want to start srsieve again and continue the sieve, open run_srsieve.bat in a text editor, and change the command line therein to the following:
[code]srsieve -m 4e9 [I]name of previous sieve file[/I][/code]Replace "name of previous sieve file" with your last copy of the sieve file. Save the file and close it, then double-click on run_srsieve.bat to run srsieve again. It will pick up where it left off and continue with the sieve.

5) Srsieve will output p/sec. and sec./factor rates onscreen, updated every minute. When you've reached a satisfactory factor rate and want to stop the sieve so you can start the PRPing, press Ctrl-C to halt srsieve as before. (There's no need to rename the output file this time, you can leave it at srsieve.out now.) Create a new text file called "srfile.bat". Open it in a text editor, and enter the following line:
[code]srfile -G srsieve.out[/code]Save and close the file. Then run srfile.bat, and srfile (srsieve's file utility) will convert srsieve.out (your final sieve file) to standard NewPGen format for PRPing. It will probably be called "t16_b3.prp" (the _b3 part will change depending on the base you're doing); rename it to whatever you want, move it to your LLR folder and proceed with the PRPing!

6) You can now go ahead and delete all your intermediate sieve files (there will be one for each time you stopped and restarted srsieve), as well as srsieve.log if you want. You may want to keep the batch files, just remember to change them to the appropriate new values for the next sieve you do. :smile:

Hope this helps! :smile:

Anon :smile:

KEP 2008-04-26 07:24

@ anon:

Thanks for your tip, it actually worked and it appears to be at least 10 times as efficient as sieving all terms individually, I'm actually quite sure that now a further speedincrease will be seen :) So on behalf of myself and those who will join me in the future (maybe rieselsieve once they complete their base 2 mission) I give you my true and deep felt thank you :)

To the rest of you, good luck on what ever part of these conjectures you are struggeling with :)

gd_barnes 2008-05-04 21:49

[quote=KEP;132191]The Riesel base 3 is tested up to k=2M and n=25k. There is a 12 remaining k's and the ranges up to 100M is in progress at once. I found that taking the k to only n=5,000 and then do sieve of the remaining k's is much more efficient (about 90% faster). Is anyony by the way knowing of a great way to sieve many different k values from n=5,001 to n=25,000? I used to use NewPGen, but it requires a great deal of manual work to prepare the sieve files. Once the sieve files is prepared Sr1sieve can be used, using a .bat file and then sieveing will be rather easy, but anyone with a great idea to speedup and reduce the amont of manual work, please consider replying to me :)

On other notice to gary: I'm not working on the base 12 k=404 (sierpinski) since it appears that my reservation did not come through, and also I feel like wanting to do more somewhere else e.g. Base 3 Riesel Conjecture :)[/quote]


KEP,

4 of your k's remaining are 3 times the value of 4 other k's that you have remaining, therefore they will eventually have the same prime (with an n-value that is 1 less) because the base is 3. Therefore the following k-values can be removed from your testing:

605658
903288
1030116
1816974

Also, 2 of your k's remaining have primes already found on the top-5000 site. Therefore the following k's can be removed from your testing:

343372 (prime at n=178255)
1575148 (prime at n=70462)

So, I am showing 6 k's remaining at k=2M and n=25K for Riesel base 3 on the web pages.

Testing note: For this project, we attempt to find the lowest prime for each k-value so just because there is a prior top-5000 prime does not mean we shouldn't test it at low n-ranges up to a reasonable limit. n=25K is a reasonable limit for base 3.

Further note: The already found top-5000 primes are typically quite rare for higher k-values for any base. There are no more of them for k<10M and only 2 more of them for k<100M for riesel base 3. So you shouldn't need to concern yourself with it until k>10M.

Now, you know how I was able to get to ZERO k's remaining at k=2M for Sierp base 3. The top-5000 site helped a lot.


Gary

KEP 2008-05-05 06:38

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;132741]KEP,

4 of your k's remaining are 3 times the value of 4 other k's that you have remaining, therefore they will eventually have the same prime (with an n-value that is 1 less) because the base is 3. Therefore the following k-values can be removed from your testing:

605658
903288
1030116
1816974

Also, 2 of your k's remaining have primes already found on the top-5000 site. Therefore the following k's can be removed from your testing:

343372 (prime at n=178255)
1575148 (prime at n=70462)
[/QUOTE]

Thanks for confirming the "3 times value - 1n per 3 times multiplication" theory that I got myself. In the future, I'll remove all k's that can be split to a value remaining at the k's remaining list. Actually I decided to save them, for later removal, once a prime for the prior value was found, since I did not know if they had to be primed to be 100% sure of the proof for base 3 Riesel. Now I'll submit a site for you on later terms, where all those k's that can be reduced below k=2M (or upper testing in future), since there is no reason to take them from n>2,501 to n=25,000, would that be an ok way to do this? Also how would you like the k-values not tested for prime, or removed because they are 3 times the value of a prior value?

Now thanks for your ranges and let's hope these new ideas will help bring us even further and faster towards our goal, since I think the new push will help dramatically increase speed :)

KEP

EDIT: If you can give me the values of those 2 k's below 100M k's also found by the top5000 prime pages, I would really appreciate it since I'm already in progress with the range up to 100M :)

gd_barnes 2008-05-05 19:26

[quote=KEP;132760]Thanks for confirming the "3 times value - 1n per 3 times multiplication" theory that I got myself. In the future, I'll remove all k's that can be split to a value remaining at the k's remaining list. Actually I decided to save them, for later removal, once a prime for the prior value was found, since I did not know if they had to be primed to be 100% sure of the proof for base 3 Riesel. Now I'll submit a site for you on later terms, where all those k's that can be reduced below k=2M (or upper testing in future), since there is no reason to take them from n>2,501 to n=25,000, would that be an ok way to do this? Also how would you like the k-values not tested for prime, or removed because they are 3 times the value of a prior value?

Now thanks for your ranges and let's hope these new ideas will help bring us even further and faster towards our goal, since I think the new push will help dramatically increase speed :)

KEP

EDIT: If you can give me the values of those 2 k's below 100M k's also found by the top5000 prime pages, I would really appreciate it since I'm already in progress with the range up to 100M :)[/quote]


KEP,

I couldn't quite tell if you were clear on this so I'll be specific about multiples of the base:

We canNOT automatically eliminate ALL k's that are k==(0 mod 3), i.e. evenly divisible by 3, for base 3.

Here is why: If k*3^n+1 has a prime at n=1 and no other known prime than 3k*3^n+1 would only have a prime at n=0 and hence would NOT be eliminated. To be eliminated n must be >= 1. Here is what I think is the best way to test to avoid a lot of manual intervention:

1. Test the base for ALL k-values (except the k's with certain mods shown on the web pages) up to some predetermined n-limit in PFGW. In my case for base 3, that limit was n=25K. In your case, it is now n=5K, although I would recommend n=10K.

2. AFTER you finish #1 and BEFORE you begin sieving the k's remaining, it is at that point that you want to eliminate any k's that are the base times another k that is REMAINING. Or stated algebraicly, eliminate k's where k(2)=b*k(1) where k(1) is "some" k that is already remaining and k(2) is the k being checked. Note that I capitalize the word REMAINING because you don't want to automatically eliminate k's that are a multiple of the base but that are NOT the base times another k that is remaining.

You can see an example of #2 above on the web pages for your Riesel base 3. Your k=687774 is shown as the k-value with the 6th highest prime at n=12824. 687774 is divisible by 3. So the question is: Why don't we show k=687774/3=229258 with a prime of n=12825 instead since that would be a more reduced form? It's because k=229258 has a prime at n=1 and hence was immediately eliminated! This is the type of situation where we must continue testing 3*k and is why I recommend both steps 1 and 2 above.

Please excuse the overly detailed explanation if this was already intuitive to you but it's not obvious to many when they start on a new base so I figured I should offer it up here.

Here are the primes on the top-5000 site for Riesel base 3 for k=10M-100M:

19660318*3^63282-1
75030224*3^133779-1

Please go ahead and test these k's up to n=25K. If you don't find a prime to that limit, than you can eliminate them from any future sieving and I'll shown their primes on the web pages, assuming they're in the top-10 for the base.

There are no known Riesel base 3 primes shown on the top-5000 site for k=2M-10M and for k=100M-1G so that should be all you need for now.


Gary

KEP 2008-05-05 20:19

@ Gary:

Thanks for your info. Sorry that I wasn't clear on my intuition, but what I meant I wanted to do, and has tried to explain on my GooglePage is exactly what you has descriped on step #1 and #2. Sorry if I caused you extra work as a lack of expression. It is obvious to me that the far easiest way to start testing a range is to use WinPFGW, but I think since a range of 1 G will leave only 40,000 candidates at n=2500 and about 5,000 candidates at n=5,000, that it will be sufficient to start sieving those candidates not going to be eliminated by lower k's remaining :smile: But again I'll decide later on, but for now it appears that the far fastes to do is to go to only n=2,500 and then sieve the remaining candidates before PRP testing useing WinPFGW, since it leaves the opportunity to stop testing k's if a prime is found.

Hope that I have not caused any confusion. But as it turns out, I have somehow given the wrong impression of what I wanted to do and in fact we were thinking to do the same :smile: However your post werent a complete waste of time, since now at least those k's remaining at sieveing below 100M will be able to be removed from the list before starting the sieve, so a little (propably non noteable) speedincrease might be a result of your effort :smile:

Thanks and again sorry if I caused you extra work and if I failed to express myself obviously and clear enough.

KEP!

gd_barnes 2008-05-05 20:34

[quote=KEP;132796]@ Gary:

Thanks for your info. Sorry that I wasn't clear on my intuition, but what I meant I wanted to do, and has tried to explain on my GooglePage is exactly what you has descriped on step #1 and #2. Sorry if I caused you extra work as a lack of expression. It is obvious to me that the far easiest way to start testing a range is to use WinPFGW, but I think since a range of 1 G will leave only 40,000 candidates at n=2500 and about 5,000 candidates at n=5,000, that it will be sufficient to start sieving those candidates not going to be eliminated by lower k's remaining :smile: But again I'll decide later on, but for now it appears that the far fastes to do is to go to only n=2,500 and then sieve the remaining candidates before PRP testing useing WinPFGW, since it leaves the opportunity to stop testing k's if a prime is found.

Hope that I have not caused any confusion. But as it turns out, I have somehow given the wrong impression of what I wanted to do and in fact we were thinking to do the same :smile: However your post werent a complete waste of time, since now at least those k's remaining at sieveing below 100M will be able to be removed from the list before starting the sieve, so a little (propably non noteable) speedincrease might be a result of your effort :smile:

Thanks and again sorry if I caused you extra work and if I failed to express myself obviously and clear enough.

KEP![/quote]

No problem at all. It will also be a good reference for others in the future.

On the sieving, IMHO n=2500 is way too low to start sieving base 3. Are you taking into account all of the time needed and the extra hassle it will take you to sieve so many k's at once? The file sizes will become enourmous when sieving 40000 k's at once at such a low n-range and will be very difficult to maniptulate.

When you say you are going to sieve at n=2500, are you referring to using srsieve followed by sr2sieve? I should mention that it has a maximum # of k's that it can sieve at once. It's somewhere between 100000 and 200000 k's I think. Even though you're looking at 40000 k's, I strongly recommend using PFGW to n=10K or at least n=5K before sieving.

But if you think it will be faster, than go ahead. Just remember that it may be somewhat faster CPU-wise but there will a lot of manual intervention, i.e. determination of k's remaining, etc., when sieving so many k's. Be sure and consider your time involved also.


Gary

gd_barnes 2008-05-05 21:27

[quote=KEP;132805]@ Gary: Well I has a feeling that it will be faster, but you are more experienced than I am, and with my quad (hopefully getting it tomorrow), I may consider to go to at least n=5,000. Actually the quad may be far from attacking and reenforcing the base 3 attack. At the moment I'm seriously considering to use 1 of the cores on sieveing the Base 19, actually preperation is already in progress, and currently I've begun using srsieve sieving from 10,001 to 250,000. I seriously consider running that range and reduce the amount of k's drasticly over the coming months. I know that I'm reserving loads of work at the moment, but at least this gives me a chance to contribute to something rather usefull. So hey please also sign me on this range: n>10000 > n =250000 for sierpinski base 19, all k's!

Thanks, and after sometime I think 2-3 month from now, this quad may be shipped to base 3 conjecture and to work with that one only, so we can consider this enrolement as praxis for the future and bigger battle it will enlist in :smile:

KEP![/quote]


It's more about manual intervention and messing with large files than anything. CPU-wise, n=2500 or 5000 may be slightly faster than 10000 or 25000 (although I doubt it on n=2500). It's just a matter of how much time you have to mess with the manipulation of large files and a large # of k's.

I'm all about results. Feel free to test it however you like. As long as it's done and not taking an extreme period of time, it makes little difference to me how you go about it.


Gary

KEP 2008-05-23 15:40

Everyone, due to lack of interest and lack of possibilities of involveing myself, I've decided to release the entire Base 3 Riesel for k>100M to anyone interested in conducting work on those billions of k's remaining. This may actually be lower in the future who knows, but for now I'm signing out, and you will occationally see me check back, once I have work to add for the Base 19 Sierpinski. It's been a pleasure to be here, and I really look forward to get online every week and see what changes has been made.

Maybe in the future, given the fact that I'm a twin, I may give the Twin Prime Search, Gary is also coordinating a try, but for now I'm signing out. Thanks for all your kindness, and hope to see you some day when I can get more involved and sit behind a permanent internet connection more than 0-2 days a week :smile:

So anyone up for using NewPGen to remove lots of candidates and remove all the k's from k>100M up to n=25,000?

Take care!

KEP!

KEP 2008-05-24 20:02

@Everyone: Thanks to Michafs script, I have gained the will to continue with this project. However for starters with, I'll only run it on 1 core and then on 2 cores and in 6 months on 6 cores. But unless anything else is noted, please reserve the entire base 3 riesel for me Gary. Now I just hope that it can be reduced even more, and that the sierpinskis can be equaly reduced, so we can just start dreaming about the bases being in the hundreds, maybe even dream so big that we can get to a point where we outrun the WinPFGW software, when it comes to the base limits which is unfortunantly at base 255 at the moment :smile:

Regards

Kenneth!

gd_barnes 2008-05-25 01:16

[quote=KEP;134283]@Everyone: Thanks to Michafs script, I have gained the will to continue with this project. However for starters with, I'll only run it on 1 core and then on 2 cores and in 6 months on 6 cores. But unless anything else is noted, please reserve the entire base 3 riesel for me Gary. Now I just hope that it can be reduced even more, and that the sierpinskis can be equaly reduced, so we can just start dreaming about the bases being in the hundreds, maybe even dream so big that we can get to a point where we outrun the WinPFGW software, when it comes to the base limits which is unfortunantly at base 255 at the moment :smile:

Regards

Kenneth![/quote]

OK, I'll reserve all of Riesel base 3 for you Kenneth. I'm making an exception here. I usually recommend that no one bite off too big of an effort at once but in this case, coordinating amongst many people when just starting this particular base is quite difficult, as you saw with the Sierp side that still has a huge testing gap. When it comes to k-values remaining, frequently k's come up that can be reduced to k-values that others may be searching.

That said, once you get past about k=100M or so and all of the k-ranges below that have been searched, it shouldn't be an issue for several people to work on it at once. The key is that the range be kept within a multiplier-of-3 range so that k's that can be reduced are reduced to k-value ranges that have ALREADY been searched. That is, if we are at k=100M, we should limit the entire reservations of everyone to k=100M-300M. If we're at k=300M, then the limit would be k=300M-900M, etc. on up to where there is no limit once we're up to the conjecture divided by 3.

The confusion came in when people were searching k=100M-120M when the lower limit had only been searched to k=~15M resulting in reduced k-values in the k=33.3M-40M range, which had not been searched yet. This looks very strange and is kind of confusing to anyone new who comes along.


Gary

KEP 2008-05-25 07:24

@Gary:

About your important 'or', I'm currently running the range 100-110M k, with Michafs script, to n<=5,000. Once they are verified, as the only k's remaining, I was considering to remove all k's that is divisable with the base, which in my case means that they can be k mod 3=0, but if this is not acceptabel (and if it involves to much manual work, though I think a spread sheat should be able to do the work for me pretty fast) I of course not will do it, so if I can get your oppinion on this it would really be appreciated.

Regards

Kenneth

Ps. It may be 14 days to 3 weeks before you really hears back anything from the further work done on the riesel base 3, due to working situations and the fact that I've stucked my Quad with other work for now. Also I have to finish wrapping the base 19 sierpinski to optimal sieve depth, before finally having 1 core availeable (hopefully in one weeks time). But in 3 weeks I may throw in the entire 6 cores. If that doesn't happen, I'll get back to you and we can then decide on how to proceed in the future run :smile: (simply to make sure we get somewhere and brings down this conjecture)

michaf 2008-05-25 07:31

Missing out one or two with known primes isn't too bad; it's only a fraction of the total work to be done.
However, if it can be avoided, the better it is :)

gd_barnes 2008-05-25 08:57

[quote=KEP;134319]@Gary:

About your important 'or', I'm currently running the range 100-110M k, with Michafs script, to n<=5,000. Once they are verified, as the only k's remaining, I was considering to remove all k's that is divisable with the base, which in my case means that they can be k mod 3=0, but if this is not acceptabel (and if it involves to much manual work, though I think a spread sheat should be able to do the work for me pretty fast) I of course not will do it, so if I can get your oppinion on this it would really be appreciated.

Regards

Kenneth

Ps. It may be 14 days to 3 weeks before you really hears back anything from the further work done on the riesel base 3, due to working situations and the fact that I've stucked my Quad with other work for now. Also I have to finish wrapping the base 19 sierpinski to optimal sieve depth, before finally having 1 core availeable (hopefully in one weeks time). But in 3 weeks I may throw in the entire 6 cores. If that doesn't happen, I'll get back to you and we can then decide on how to proceed in the future run :smile: (simply to make sure we get somewhere and brings down this conjecture)[/quote]


No...you can't just remove ALL k's that are divisible by 3. You'll miss some k-values that are remaining. They must be divisible by a POWER OF 3 AND reducable to a k-value that is already remaining. That's because the k divided by a power of 3 may have a prime at ONLY n=1. For example:

Let's say that k*3^1-1 is prime and that is the only known prime for that particular k-value.

Now, let's say that you're searching a k-value that is 3 times the above k-value but you fail to find a prime up to n=10K or n=25K or whatever you're searching to.

It would be incorrect to automatically remove 3k*3^n-1 simply because the k is divisible by 3. We know by the above that 3k*3^0-1 is prime but n must be >= 1 and we have not found a prime for 3k that fits that condition.

One more thing...be sure and reduce the k-value all the way. Sometimes you may not find that k / 3 is remaining but that k / 3^2 or k / 3^3 or k / 3^4 IS remaining. In any of those cases, your k could be removed.

Regardless, removing multiples of the base must be done very carefully. If you are now hesitent to do this, simply attach a spreadsheet of k-values remaining that are divisible by a power of 3 and I'll verify that they can removed. Well over 90% can usually be removed but if you look on the Sierp base 3 reservations page, you'll find that probably 10-15 of them ARE divisible by 3 for just the above reason, simply because k/3 had a prime at only n=1.

About what Micha said, it's OK if you leave a k-value in where we already know a large prime exists, whether it be on top-5000 or found by someone in this project. We'll find it eventually. But removing one where there isn't a known prime simply because it is divisible by 3 would be bad.


Gary

KEP 2008-05-25 09:07

@Gary: I think given the fact that it really doesn't give that much difference in sieving speed, that I'll just (at least for n<=25,000) keep all the k's remaining and take them all to n<=25,000 simply to avoid mistakes :smile:

Thanks for your feedback.

Kenneth!

gd_barnes 2008-05-25 09:25

[quote=KEP;134331]@Gary: I think given the fact that it really doesn't give that much difference in sieving speed, that I'll just (at least for n<=25,000) keep all the k's remaining and take them all to n<=25,000 simply to avoid mistakes :smile:

Thanks for your feedback.

Kenneth![/quote]

Without a doubt, that is the best way to search them. It's too much effort to pull them out ahead of time. What I was referring to was AFTER the search and when you actually report them as remaining here. That is when I remove multiples of the base if they can or k-values with previously known large primes.


Gary

KEP 2008-05-25 18:37

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;134334]Without a doubt, that is the best way to search them. It's too much effort to pull them out ahead of time. What I was referring to was AFTER the search and when you actually report them as remaining here. That is when I remove multiples of the base if they can or k-values with previously known large primes.


Gary[/QUOTE]

OK, as long as we are clear :smile:... however I think, because I'm not sure if I've removed 1 k that shouldn't have been removed for k<=1M, that I'll eventually do a doublecheck, but not for the moment. If anyone takes the double check, please e-mail me: kenneth 010982 @ g mail . com!

Thanks.

Kenneth!

Siemelink 2008-05-31 20:46

Riesel base 3
 
201886*3^39101-1
301096*3^49050-1
731636*3^37215-1
993424*3^25296-1
1512358*3^63729-1
1728886*3^32283-1

are all primes, by way of srsieve -> sr1sieve -> LLR -> PFGW

Enjoy, Willem

KEP 2008-05-31 21:45

[QUOTE=Siemelink;134868]201886*3^39101-1
301096*3^49050-1
731636*3^37215-1
993424*3^25296-1
1512358*3^63729-1
1728886*3^32283-1

are all primes, by way of srsieve -> sr1sieve -> LLR -> PFGW

Enjoy, Willem[/QUOTE]

Great work Willem, this actually means, that Gary can now at least for the next 3-4 weeks keep a neet ZERO k's remaining below 2M k. Now can anyone doublecheck if k 1816974 can actually be removed from the remaining list (I guess with the primes you had found), since this one particular k was removed when I still thought that k mod 3 = 0 could be removed without a problem, which it later on has shown it can't :smile:

But again great work, hope you can kill the 1,500 primes I'll submit (approximately) or maybe 3,000 k's before removed doubles coming in 4 weeks (maybe 3). In case you run out of work, please feel free to attack the ranges of k's for base 3 riesel with k greater than 1500 M and bring them to 25,000 at first.

Actually I think from a sieving point of view, that we would be far better of, if we actually tested the remaining 62.5G k's up to n<=25,000 and then made a combined sieving effort to n<=50,000 since its always faster to sieve more candidates (according to what I've been told way back) than to sieve just part of a range at a time. Also with the few candidates seeming to remaining (less than 250,000) it shouldn't be claiming much on the RAM use. Sieving 50,000 base 3 k's for 25,000 n required on my machine ~163 MB of RAM as of testing of today.

So any chance you join me in this combat?

KEP 2008-05-31 22:18

I've now decided to run the Riesel Base 3 up to at least 1.5 G, so in 8 hours please consider this range as in progress aswell. So therefor if you decide to join in the effort, please consider for Riesel Base 3 to do work on k's above k 1,500,000,000.

Thank you.

KEP!

gd_barnes 2008-06-01 05:08

[quote=Siemelink;134868]
201886*3^39101-1
301096*3^49050-1
731636*3^37215-1
993424*3^25296-1
1512358*3^63729-1
1728886*3^32283-1

are all primes, by way of srsieve -> sr1sieve -> LLR -> PFGW

Enjoy, Willem[/quote]

Nice work Willem! You and Rogue are our k slayers! :smile:

If you want, take a hack at the Sierp side of things on a few of the smaller 240 k's remaining at n=25K.

[quote=KEP;134870]Great work Willem, this actually means, that Gary can now at least for the next 3-4 weeks keep a neet ZERO k's remaining below 2M k. Now can anyone doublecheck if k 1816974 can actually be removed from the remaining list (I guess with the primes you had found), since this one particular k was removed when I still thought that k mod 3 = 0 could be removed without a problem, which it later on has shown it can't :smile:

But again great work, hope you can kill the 1,500 primes I'll submit (approximately) or maybe 3,000 k's before removed doubles coming in 4 weeks (maybe 3). In case you run out of work, please feel free to attack the ranges of k's for base 3 riesel with k greater than 1500 M and bring them to 25,000 at first.

Actually I think from a sieving point of view, that we would be far better of, if we actually tested the remaining 62.5G k's up to n<=25,000 and then made a combined sieving effort to n<=50,000 since its always faster to sieve more candidates (according to what I've been told way back) than to sieve just part of a range at a time. Also with the few candidates seeming to remaining (less than 250,000) it shouldn't be claiming much on the RAM use. Sieving 50,000 base 3 k's for 25,000 n required on my machine ~163 MB of RAM as of testing of today.

So any chance you join me in this combat?[/quote]

I agree from an efficiency standpoint, it makes sense to sieve them all at once but like Willem, I found it fun to find a few higher primes, which is why there are no k-values remaining for k<2.9M for Sierp base 3.

One more thing, k=1816974 is not considered remaining because k=201886 WAS remaining and 201886*3^2=1816974. And now that k=201886 has a prime at n=39101, then k=1816974 has a prime at n=39099.

So, I'm confused as to why you say that k=1816974 needs to be checked? It would have been removed from your processing list after you found that k=201886 was still remaining.

It's either one or the other but not both, otherwise we end up doing large amounts of duplicate work for n>25K. That is if k=201886 has a prime for n<=2 but k=1816974 has no primes for n>=1, then k=1816974 is remaining. If k=201886 has no prime, then k=201886 is remaining and not k=1816974.

Because, as you found, it's easier to search all even k's for n<=25K, we do so even though there is some duplicate work on multiples of the base. It's after we are done with that initial process that we are eliminating multiples of the base in the 90-95% of the situations that we can do so. And we do it then because doing duplicate work with long testing times would be extremely inefficient. It's better to take the time to manually remove them as testing times get longer.


Gary

KEP 2008-06-01 07:44

@Everyone: Due to a loss of interest, and the fact that I would seriously like to get going with one of my older projects, I've decided to bring the Riesel Base 3 k no further than k<=1500M. So to anyone willing to take over the k's above, feel free to start doing so. I will still complete the entire range up to k 1,500,000,000 all the way up to n<=25,000. However this is all expected to be done and completed in at most 4 weeks.

Good luck on processing the remaining k's and remove those k's left. Maybe I check back at later basis, but for now consider that running to be the only one. And of course I will continue on my dual in 4 weeks or so to try and bring down the sierpinski base 19.

Regards!

KEP!

KEP 2008-06-01 09:55

[QUOTE=KEP;134890]@Everyone: Due to a loss of interest, and the fact that I would seriously like to get going with one of my older projects, I've decided to bring the Riesel Base 3 k no further than k<=1500M. So to anyone willing to take over the k's above, feel free to start doing so. I will still complete the entire range up to k 1,500,000,000 all the way up to n<=25,000. However this is all expected to be done and completed in at most 4 weeks.

Good luck on processing the remaining k's and remove those k's left. Maybe I check back at later basis, but for now consider that running to be the only one. And of course I will continue on my dual in 4 weeks or so to try and bring down the sierpinski base 19.

Regards!

KEP![/QUOTE]

Please excuse me, but I seriously lost interest, so for now at least, I'll only take this Base 3 Riesel to k<=500M and n<=25000. Sorry for leaving, but I just need a break where I consult my old projects and gives them a boost, and also it is better if I start doing some serious work on the sierpinski base 19, before my reservation stalls and I might forget about it.

But still good luck folks on bringing down these hard and "easy" conjectures. And who knows maybe see you again in the future. Also Gary, the 18..... k for riesel base 3 with k<=2M was eluded by myself at n<=5000 testing, so even though it remained in the list before I removed it and stoped LLR testing on this candidate because it essentially were the same, no prime will have been missed... sorry if this caused confusion.

Regards

KEP!

KEP 2008-06-13 15:59

Regarding the Riesel Base 3:

I'm not going to take the Riesel Base 3 above k=500,000,000. So for fairness I'm unreserving all k above 500M and keeping my reservation for all k<=500M. It has turned out to involve a great bit more work than I nescessarialy is willing to provide, and also a fact is if I'm going to complete all k's stated by the conjecture for now, the conjecture want be taken to n<=25K for all k's for at least 15-30 years from now.

Now some timings: Expect every 100 million k's to take up about 1 month of computation time.

But to sum up, the Riesel Base 3 is now availeable for everyone for k>500M. Thanks for understanding.

In case you may wonder what else I'm going to do, I will most likely spend the next 3-4 month working on the base 19 sierpinski. And maybe once I complete my reservation for Base 19 sierpinski I might extend it if further k's remain. Else I will propably do something else usefull :smile:

Take care everyone.

Kenneth!

KEP 2008-08-08 15:16

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;138831]I'm hoping that KEP will be done with k<500M on the Riesel side within the next month or so and we can attack that instead. I'll follow up with him and see where he is at.[/QUOTE]

Well as stated in old and recent e-mails to Gary, I had approximately 255,000 k's remaining at n<=500. I decided to split them into 26 sets of 10,000 k's or less. As tomorrow, the first of the 26 sets (covering k>=~490M to k<=500M) will be done. After that I'll start tackeling on full throttle the first set (covering k<=~22M or 27M, can't quite remember). After it completes, I'll put full throttle on set 2,3,4 etc... so in 1 month I should be able to hand over some completed sets covering to at least k<=100M. :smile:

Thanks for all your patience!

KEP!

Ps. I expect (before removal of "redundant" k's) to end up with approximately 2,900 k's remaining at n<=25K for k<=500M. Which again will have us end up with approximately 365,400 k's remaining at n<=25K! How you decide to get to n<=25K, I'll let you decide, but I've mapped a plan to Gary that you can feel free to follow or discard as useless if something else occurs as more obvious and as being faster :smile:

KEP 2008-09-05 22:13

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;141022]We were planning on running a team drive on that n-range that would run the same time as a team drive on the Riesel k=0-50M range. I guess the Riesel range is out now.

KEP, please reserve a smaller range that you absolutely KNOW that you can complete. See what Michaf is doing where he reserves a range, finishes it in a few days, then reserves another, etc.

Suggestion: Reserve k=50M-60M up to n=100K. Finish that. Reserve k=60M-70M to n=100K, etc. until you're ready to move on to something else. Thanks.

Why is Riesel base 3 more difficult than Sierp base 3? They're basically one and the same as far as searching for and finding primes. Riesel has a lower conjecture so it should be ultimately easier. The chance of finding primes on either side is going to be nearly identical. I don't understand your reasoning.

Why would a local power outage make it to where you can't run srfile to remove k's with primes? If you can't run srfile, then you certainly couldn't run srsieve and LLR on SIERP base 3 for the range you are wanting to reserve. Once again, your logic baffles me.

No need to answer the last two paragraphs as I was just pointing out a logic flaw but please respond to the paragraph asking you to reduce your reservation.


Gary[/QUOTE]

I'm discarding the work on the sierp base 3, and decides to put the Quad on the entire 500M k range for riesel base 3. So do not begin work on Riesel base 3 and do not consider this range lost! I ask for your patience, and ETA is somewhere in the future. Thank you.

I'm not sure if there is any logic, but in my humble experience, it seems to be a lot easier to prime the Sierpinski k's compared to priming the Riesel k's.

KEP

KEP 2008-09-05 23:30

OK to point out exactly what I do:

1. Redoing the entire k<=500M range for Riesel base 3
2. Doing PRP tests up to n<=25,000
3. Verifies PRP tests
4. Does strict test of the PRP k's that turned out composite to n<=25,000

A request for the future:

-- Someone to develop af .pl script which can use "primes.out"-file from Michafs script as input and write the verified primes to "verprimes.out" and the composites to "vercomposit.out". --

Such a script, will make it easier to complete large ranges and reduce the need for reading through an entire log file on several GB. The wanted script needs to be developed, if any one would like to see me continue doing work on the Riesel base 3 conjecture.

And now I appologize, it appears that for Base 3 the PRP testing is a lot faster (more than just 30 %) so now I just awaits to see how many composites is among those k's remaining, but if it in the future can be done this fast, no doubt I'll continue if such a script as requested previously gets developed.

Regards

KEP

Ps. All k<=92997048 is in progress at the moment, so I hope everyone can accept the further delay, but with the lesson that I learned this time, I really think that a further and more speedy progress can be completed in the near future :smile:

Pps. It appears to be at least 7 times faster to do PRP tests compared to strict prime tests! So sorry Gary and anyone else for not listening or respecting your words of wisdom!

gd_barnes 2008-09-06 04:54

[quote=KEP;141044]All k<=92997048 is in progress at the moment, so I hope everyone can accept the further delay, but with the lesson that I learned this time, I really think that a further and more speedy progress can be completed in the near future :smile:

Pps. It appears to be at least 7 times faster to do PRP tests compared to strict prime tests! So sorry Gary and anyone else for not listening or respecting your words of wisdom![/quote]


Please complete all k<100M to n=25K and send me the primes for n>=1K as well as the k's remaining. That is what will help us most and what I need to verify it all and start a team sieve and drive for the Riesel side.

In other words, don't concern yourself with anything for k>100M right now until k<=100M is complete.

Like you have concluded, just do PRP tests for now. When you have the entire k<100M range done, then do the proofs. For the few composite PRP's that you find, I'm sure you'll quickly find slightly higher primes for them.


Thanks,
Gary

KEP 2008-09-06 08:51

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;141081]Please complete all k<100M to n=25K and send me the primes for n>=1K as well as the k's remaining. That is what will help us most and what I need to verify it all and start a team sieve and drive for the Riesel side.

In other words, don't concern yourself with anything for k>100M right now until k<=100M is complete.

Like you have concluded, just do PRP tests for now. When you have the entire k<100M range done, then do the proofs. For the few composite PRP's that you find, I'm sure you'll quickly find slightly higher primes for them.


Thanks,
Gary[/QUOTE]

I'll do PRP for all k<=100M to n<=25K. Current status at approximately 11 hours is n<=7,300 to n<=7800. So hopefully next weekend you can start up the mini-drive for base 3 Riesel. After I complete k<=100M, I'll send you the k's remaining and only the primes that you asked for unless you can accept that the primes is n>=501 in stead of n>=1K. Anyway the ranges is overall 33% complete. Now I'm just waiting for the result to see how many PRP is actually composite (if any) :smile:

KEP!

gd_barnes 2008-09-06 08:56

[quote=KEP;141103]I'll do PRP for all k<=100M to n<=25K. Current status at approximately 11 hours is n<=7,300 to n<=7800. So hopefully next weekend you can start up the mini-drive for base 3 Riesel. After I complete k<=100M, I'll send you the k's remaining and only the primes that you asked for unless you can accept that the primes is n>=501 in stead of n>=1K. Anyway the ranges is overall 33% complete. Now I'm just waiting for the result to see how many PRP is actually composite (if any) :smile:

KEP![/quote]


Sure, go ahead and send me all primes n>=501. No problem.

gd_barnes 2008-09-22 06:09

Riesel base 3 at k=93M and n=25K
 
KEP reported in an Email on 9/12 that he had completed Riesel base 3 to k=93M and n=25K. He also sent primes > 500 and all 407 k's that were remaining.

KEP, I've checked the k's remaining and your logic for removing k's that were multiples of the base. I could find no errors! Very nice work! :smile:

I did find one k remaining that had a previous top-5000 prime. It is:
75030224*3^133779-1

So there are officially 406 k's remaining for the range. The web pages now show the k's remaining and top 10 primes for the base.

I will reserve k=93M-100M up to n=25K to complete all k<100M. ETA is ~3-4 days on 2 slow cores. Sometime within a few weeks after that, we will start a mini-drive to take the entire k-range up to n=100K.


Gary

KEP 2008-09-22 08:41

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;143387]KEP reported in an Email on 9/12 that he had completed Riesel base 3 to k=93M and n=25K. He also sent primes > 500 and all 407 k's that were remaining.

KEP, I've checked the k's remaining and your logic for removing k's that were multiples of the base. I could find no errors! Very nice work! :smile:

I did find one k remaining that had a previous top-5000 prime. It is:
75030224*3^133779-1

So there are officially 406 k's remaining for the range. The web pages now show the k's remaining and top 10 primes for the base.

I will reserve k=93M-100M up to n=25K to complete all k<100M. ETA is ~3-4 days on 2 slow cores. Sometime within a few weeks after that, we will start a mini-drive to take the entire k-range up to n=100K.


Gary[/QUOTE]

Hope you saw my e-mail before you got to far. Thanks for your timings in the other thread. I know some of the k's removed as result of q^n, is deffinently going to be doubles, since I copied a bit more of the list of k's removed than was actually nescessary :smile:

Good work on finding this extra prime, I had only checked for removal with q^n-1, and not for previously top5000 primes. Looking forward to be taking new work on the Riesel base 3 again in the future, as soon as I complete what I've for now reserved :smile:

Also in the future, you will recieve only entire 100M ranges. Just hope you didn't get to far on the Rb3 range, since it is still in work on 2 of my 6 cores, so progress will be steady and slow but I'll get there before long :smile:

KEP

gd_barnes 2008-09-22 09:24

[quote=KEP;143399]Hope you saw my e-mail before you got to far. Thanks for your timings in the other thread. I know some of the k's removed as result of q^n, is deffinently going to be doubles, since I copied a bit more of the list of k's removed than was actually nescessary :smile:

Good work on finding this extra prime, I had only checked for removal with q^n-1, and not for previously top5000 primes. Looking forward to be taking new work on the Riesel base 3 again in the future, as soon as I complete what I've for now reserved :smile:

Also in the future, you will recieve only entire 100M ranges. Just hope you didn't get to far on the Rb3 range, since it is still in work on 2 of my 6 cores, so progress will be steady and slow but I'll get there before long :smile:

KEP[/quote]


Sounds good. Yes, I got your Email. I've stopped my effort now. Per my Email, please send the primes n>500 for your newest completed k-range.

Edit: Got the primes. Later today, I'll show you as having completed Riesel base 3 to k=134M and n=25K. Very nice work! :smile:


Gary

gd_barnes 2008-09-22 23:51

KEP has now reported completion to k=134M and n=25K for Riesel base 3.

621 k's are remaining in the range. He is continuing on to k=500M and n=25K.

The web pages now show all appropriate info.

For all of you who like to find larger primes for the smallest k's remaining on a base, here's a great chance! :smile: Per the pages, the k's < 5M that are still remaining for this base are: 2794756, 3591446, 3677878, 4223272, and 4245112. They have only been searched to n=25K so far.

I'm going to start sieving k<100M for n=25K-100K for another mini-drive.


Gary

henryzz 2008-09-23 16:02

could i take 2794756*3^n-1 please

henryzz 2008-09-23 17:37

2794756*3^27174-1 is prime

em99010pepe 2008-09-23 17:39

That was fast!

henryzz 2008-09-23 18:14

yep:smile:
im gonna start on 3591446 now

gd_barnes 2008-09-23 20:11

[quote=henryzz;143546]yep:smile:
im gonna start on 3591446 now[/quote]

That was quick work on that first one. :smile: If you don't find a prime on one of them, just let us know how far you tested them.

Primes have now been found for all k<3.5M. Excellent!


Thanks,
Gary

henryzz 2008-09-25 15:14

at 80k with 3591446 now
when i get to 100k i will start the next three together and take them to 100k
after that any remaining ks i will take higher

u dont mind me doing all of them i hope?:smile:

gd_barnes 2008-09-26 04:43

[quote=henryzz;143748]at 80k with 3591446 now
when i get to 100k i will start the next three together and take them to 100k
after that any remaining ks i will take higher

u dont mind me doing all of them i hope?:smile:[/quote]


No, no problem with you doing them 2-3 k's at a time.

I would suggest limiting them to just 2-3 at a time at this point. My intent is to start a team drive for ALL k's < 100M and take them to n=100K within the next couple of weeks. So whatever k's you can find primes for before that will help speed the drive along in the future.


Gary

henryzz 2008-09-26 20:05

3591446 is at 100k unreserving it

3677878, 4223272, and 4245112 are sieved and at 29k so far

KEP 2008-09-26 20:47

[QUOTE=henryzz;143882]3591446 is at 100k unreserving it

3677878, 4223272, and 4245112 are sieved and at 29k so far[/QUOTE]

Wow henryzz, KEP is reporting his great admirasion towards your effort. Maybe in the future, you could be interested in running some n>=1 to n<=25,000 work for Riesel base 3 :smile: I'm only suggesting this, since it takes a lot of work to produce a small amount of work.

And to Gary, I'm not sure how much maintenance it will require, but I think it could make the CRUS project more interesting for those who hasn't joined us, or at least for me, if we could keep the "ZERO k's remaining below (k-value left, -1 or -2)". So is such feature acceptable for you to maintain and carry out maintenance? It's really not that important with such a feature, but I think its a need statement allowing for people with no clue whatsoever about this project and what we are doing, to determine themself how we progress.

Also I can say, the Riesel Base 3 attack website is no longer going to be maintenanced, but eventually a list containing the PRPs that is actually later verified as composites will be posted on my site. Once such a list containing not only the k/n pair being "composite PRP" but also the "proven prime" k/n pair, is existing, then I'll let you all know about it.

Now every one, go ahead and kille those 620 k's remaining. Happy "war" everyone :smile:

Take care!

Kenneth!

EDIT: I can say, that hopefully by mid next week, all k<=250M will have been tested to n<=25,000 and all redundant k's will have been removed as well all remaining k's will have been send to Gary. It requires quite some manual work, and my computers say that they have at lest 36 hours of testing remaining at current time, so I want bet on anything earlier than mid next week to finish the Riesel base 3 k<=250M range... at that level I figure that at least 1100 k's will remain, maybe as much as 1300 k's will remain :smile:

henryzz 2008-09-27 08:05

i would quite happily help you to prp low n values at some point
once a team drive is set up covering the ks i am currently working on would probably be a good time

how long does it take to take 1M ks to 25k on one core of a Q6600?

4245112*3^34528-1 is prime
this just about halved the remaining candidates:smile:

KEP 2008-09-27 09:25

[QUOTE=henryzz;143913]i would quite happily help you to prp low n values at some point
once a team drive is set up covering the ks i am currently working on would probably be a good time

how long does it take to take 1M ks to 25k on one core of a Q6600?

4245112*3^34528-1 is prime
this just about halved the remaining candidates:smile:[/QUOTE]

Thanks for wanna help out :smile: It takes approximately 8-12 hours on a single core, to PRP test 500000 k's (1M k since only even k's is tested) on a Q6600. The fastest and easiest appears to be to take all k to n<=2500 and then sieve the remaining candidates. But you can do it however you decide to do it, I've just learned a lot on working with the k<=500M, and my experience is that to test all k's to n<=500 is to low, but to test any k to n>2500 is to slow compared to sieving :smile:

By the way, good prime you got there. It actually helps us make 8 other k's prime later on when constructing the proof. So at current, you have also primed following k/n pairs:

4245112*3^34528-1 (yours prime)
12735336*3^34527-1 (removed by your prime)
38206008*3^34526-1 (removed by your prime)
114618024*3^34525-1 (removed by your prime)
343854072*3^34524-1 (removed by your prime)
1031562216*3^34523-1 (removed by your prime)
3094686648*3^34522-1 (removed by your prime)
9284059944*3^34521-1 (removed by your prime)
27852179832*3^34520-1 (removed by your prime)

So pretty good work. And again thanks for wanna help out later. I actually hope that this conjecture can be taken to n<=25K for all k's before I get 30. This gives us 1435 days from today to reach that goal :smile:

Regards

Kenneth!

henryzz 2008-09-27 09:52

sounds good
what scripts do u use for this
do u just manually use srfile to remove ks from a file when llring or does a script do it for you

KEP 2008-09-27 10:11

[QUOTE=henryzz;143916]sounds good
what scripts do u use for this
do u just manually use srfile to remove ks from a file when llring or does a script do it for you[/QUOTE]

Well Michaf created a script, which test any even k in a range defined by a min-k and a max-k to a max-n. This script runs under WinPFGW and it PRP tests the entire range that you defines in the script file, before running the script.

The primes above, I just used the calculator to find, but once a range gets to n<=25000 I use a spreadsheet, to remove any k which can be reduced to a lower existing k at n<=25000 through a 3^q division. By the way, do you only LLR the primes or do you also verify the primes, using WinPFGW with the -tp flag in the command line?

Regards

Kenneth

henryzz 2008-09-27 12:01

i have been proving them with pfgw using -tp or -tc

i meant after pfgw has done its work and u are using srsieve and llr how do u remove ur ks from the sieved file do u have an automated way

3677878 and 4223272 are at 52k

KEP 2008-09-27 12:39

[QUOTE=henryzz;143922]i have been proving them with pfgw using -tp or -tc

i meant after pfgw has done its work and u are using srsieve and llr how do u remove ur ks from the sieved file do u have an automated way

3677878 and 4223272 are at 52k[/QUOTE]

Ups, my bad :smile:

After PFGW has done its work, I use this script in the first line of the NewPGen file that srfile creates from the output file srsieve creates. This line replaces the NewPGen coding that srfile creates using -G when completed:

ABC $a*3^$b-1 // {number_primes,$a,1}

$a represents the k-values and the coding between {} tells PFGW to only find one prime per k even if further n's should remain untested.

$b represents the n-value.

If a k is primed, PFGW still reads the k/n pairs, before jumping straight to the next k. I've found that searching the n<=25K is way easier this way, since LLR don't know how to skip testing of k's already primed :smile:

So to answer your question shortly, there really is no need to remove k's manually from the input file, since PFGW skips the tests itself aslong as it gets the above coding :smile:

But srfile does have a -d function which removes the k*b^n sequence that you have already primed. Sadly the coding that anon send me some time ago doesn't seem to work, since the '^' is not recognized by srfile, so in fact I've never really been succesfull in removing k sequences other ways than by hand :smile:

Regards

Kenneth

Ps. If this doesn't answered your question or there is something else you need to know or feels like wanting to know, please feel free to ask further questions, this is after all a very helpfull community :smile:

henryzz 2008-09-27 13:11

that answered it perfectly i didnt realize u didnt use llr for your second pass

KEP 2008-09-27 13:49

[QUOTE=henryzz;143929]that answered it perfectly i didnt realize u didnt use llr for your second pass[/QUOTE]

well I don't use LLR since it is 30 % faster (at least), but using the previously given script line to you, saves hundreds of tests that LLR has to do, which in the end will make PFGW faster than running LLR on these small k/n pairs.

Glad I could be of assistance :smile:

em99010pepe 2008-09-27 22:28

Within two or three days I would like to help you KEP. Can you send me work for 4 cores?

KEP 2008-09-27 23:37

[QUOTE=em99010pepe;143961]Within two or three days I would like to help you KEP. Can you send me work for 4 cores?[/QUOTE]

Glad to see your interest in the Riesel base 3. My hope and dream is that all k's can be tested to n<=25000 within the next 1435 days (1. september 2012). So thanks for whatever you decide to do for the effort :smile:

I'm not aware if you has Michafs script. However it would be need if you could figure out how many Million/Billion of k's you can/would like to take to n<=25000, then I'll just start my next ranges from where you tells me you will stop working. Please notice that the least availeable k to PRP test today is k=500,000,002 and above :smile:

Its late here, so in case of false answer or confusion, please feel free to ask again :smile:

KEP

em99010pepe 2008-09-28 08:36

I'll put it in a simple matter, I want work for a week to be done on a Q6600. You decide what to run...

KEP 2008-09-28 17:46

[QUOTE=em99010pepe;143987]I'll put it in a simple matter, I want work for a week to be done on a Q6600. You decide what to run...[/QUOTE]

Then just wait untill Gary has prepared the mini-drive for Riesel base 3, because I really doesn't has any tasks on this stage and with what I'm doing, that can be completed in under a week. But in case I get work that can be done in less than a week, I will send it to you on e-mail :)

KEP

em99010pepe 2008-09-28 18:12

[quote=KEP;144001]Then just wait untill Gary has prepared the mini-drive for Riesel base 3, because I really doesn't has any tasks on this stage and with what I'm doing, that can be completed in under a week. But in case I get work that can be done in less than a week, I will send it to you on e-mail :)

KEP[/quote]

When I am done with Sierp base 3 reservation I want to boost your work. You can't have all the credits for yourself...lol

em99010pepe 2008-09-28 20:53

KEP,

Got your email but I thought I was only going to PRP the candidates like the mini-drive and not generation the file and sieve. I'll stay with Sierp Base 6 mini-drive.

Carlos

KEP 2008-09-29 14:48

[QUOTE=em99010pepe;144012]KEP,

Got your email but I thought I was only going to PRP the candidates like the mini-drive and not generation the file and sieve. I'll stay with Sierp Base 6 mini-drive.

Carlos[/QUOTE]

Just to confirm, and to let everyone know: I accept your unreservation. It really werent extra work for me, so no harm done :smile: But if you feel like wanna take out some big ranges, you're more than welcome back at any given time :smile:

But for now I'll see when I can continue do more work on Riesel base 3, on my own... maybe in a month or a couple of years, who knows what I decide once I complete the work I've left as reserved...

KEP

gd_barnes 2008-09-30 07:29

Carlos,

I think Micha indicated an interest in sieving Riesel base 3 k<100M for n=25K-100K. If he's working on that, I'll create a mini-drive out of that base when he's done sieving to n=~100G or so.

If he's not working on it, I'll start some sieving on it next week.


Gary

gd_barnes 2008-10-05 03:03

KEP reported by Email that he has completed Riesel base 3 up to k=250M and n=25K on Oct. 1st!

The effort was reviewed and is correct. Very nice work! There are now 1178 k's remaining for k<250M.

The web pages have now been updated for all reservations, search ranges, and primes at CRUS in the last week.


Gary

gd_barnes 2008-10-05 03:05

Micha confirmed by PM that he is sieving Riesel base 3 for k<100M and n=25K-100K. After he has sieved to an appropriate depth, I'll start a mini-drive for n=25K-50K.


Gary

henryzz 2008-10-05 07:19

3677878 and 4223272 have reached 100k with no primes:cry:
i am unreserving them
2/5 numbers i have tested have had a prime

gd_barnes 2008-10-05 07:40

[quote=henryzz;144518]3677878 and 4223272 have reached 100k with no primes:cry:
i am unreserving them
2/5 numbers i have tested have had a prime[/quote]

Cool. Thanks for the update and testing those. Eliminating 40-50% of k's for n=25K-100K is close to what I would except.

Feel free to take the next 2-3 of them or grab a file from the Sierp mini-drive. n=1K files posted are now posted there for n=85K-100K.


Gary

KEP 2008-10-05 14:12

I would like to reserve k<=5M up to 1M for Riesel base 3. I'm still keeping my other reservations, but I feels like I wanna be part of finding bigger primes. Already now it appears to be rather easy sieveable, so I'll sieve the 3 k's untill my Sierp base 19 reservation is completed and then I'll pause any else I've pending and work on this recent Riesel base 3 reservation :smile:

Hope its ok :smile:

KEP

EDIT: Just for clearence, I'm keeping all currently reserved work, but would like to add this to my list of reservations :smile:

gd_barnes 2008-10-06 08:26

[quote=KEP;144550]I would like to reserve k<=5M up to 1M for Riesel base 3. I'm still keeping my other reservations, but I feels like I wanna be part of finding bigger primes. Already now it appears to be rather easy sieveable, so I'll sieve the 3 k's untill my Sierp base 19 reservation is completed and then I'll pause any else I've pending and work on this recent Riesel base 3 reservation :smile:

Hope its ok :smile:

KEP

EDIT: Just for clearence, I'm keeping all currently reserved work, but would like to add this to my list of reservations :smile:[/quote]


OK, that's fine. As prime as base 3 is, I would expect you to find a prime on all of them before n=1M. Good luck on finding a top-5000 prime! :smile:


Gary

KEP 2008-10-06 14:29

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;144611]OK, that's fine. As prime as base 3 is, I would expect you to find a prime on all of them before n=1M. Good luck on finding a top-5000 prime! :smile:


Gary[/QUOTE]

Thanks!

At 151,700,000,000 p ~43,331 candidates remain.

If a top5000 candidate exists I'll catch it, no doubt about it :smile:

Kenneth!

KEP 2008-10-13 16:04

3591446*3^191177-1 is prime... only 2 to go :smile:

gd_barnes 2008-10-13 22:20

[quote=KEP;145280]3591446*3^191177-1 is prime... only 2 to go :smile:[/quote]


VERY nice! 91222 digits. Not far from top-5000 territory.

Historical note: This is the 6th largest prime ever found for Riesel base 3!!:george:

k=3677878 is now the lowest k with no prime for this base.

Siemelink 2008-10-14 19:27

Primality testing 202823362*3^62951-1 [N+1, Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge]
Running N+1 test using discriminant 3, base 1+sqrt(3)
202823362*3^62951-1 is prime! (294.2833s+0.0351s)

A randomly picked k.

Willem.

henryzz 2008-10-15 19:09

[quote=gd_barnes;144506]Micha confirmed by PM that he is sieving Riesel base 3 for k<100M and n=25K-100K. After he has sieved to an appropriate depth, I'll start a mini-drive for n=25K-50K.


Gary[/quote]
vaguely when is this gonna be
i want to know so i can fit my work around it

michaf 2008-10-15 19:28

[quote=henryzz;145473]vaguely when is this gonna be
i want to know so i can fit my work around it[/quote]

I have sent the sieved file to Gary yesterday.
I reckon he'll process it into separate file when he has some time.

henryzz 2008-10-15 19:46

[quote=michaf;145474]I have sent the sieved file to Gary yesterday.
I reckon he'll process it into separate file when he has some time.[/quote]
good i will continue doing llrnet until then

gd_barnes 2008-10-16 23:33

[quote=henryzz;145477]good i will continue doing llrnet until then[/quote]

At your service, the mini-drive for Riesel base 3 is ready to go! :smile:

Micha, there were 2 k's in your sieved file that already had primes so I removed them leaving 434 k's remaining. One that Henry (I believe) recently found a prime on and one that I erroneously left as remaining on my Riesel base 3 reservations page where there was a prime on the top-5000 site. The primes are:

4245112*3^34528-1
75030224*3^133779-1


Gary

gd_barnes 2008-10-16 23:38

[quote=Siemelink;145409]Primality testing 202823362*3^62951-1 [N+1, Brillhart-Lehmer-Selfridge]
Running N+1 test using discriminant 3, base 1+sqrt(3)
202823362*3^62951-1 is prime! (294.2833s+0.0351s)

A randomly picked k.

Willem.[/quote]

Very funny random work. :smile:

Can we get another random prime on a k > 100M ? lol

KEP 2008-10-17 14:13

@Gary:

1. Thanks for taking a defense of my statement/dream... I'm not sure if it is possible to get even the base 3 riesel conjecture to n<=50M since it will take at n=50M approximately 178 days to do 1 test... but it's always nice to have dreams to pursuit :smile:

2. I would seriously once I get the energy (a little low on this at the moment) update the stats and ressurrect the "Riesel base 3 attack" website. Expect nothing though before k<=500M has been completed... currently testing around k<=350M, but before christmas maybe a new website and new strength can be found to do an overall much hugher effort...

@All: can you all please send me for Riesel base 3, the primes where n>25000 to my e-mail: kenneth 010982 @ g mail . com (remove spaces)... this will be very helpfull when continuing to create the proof. Thanks in advance!

Take care everyone!

KEP!

KEP 2008-10-22 14:01

[quote=gd_barnes;146107]?? You're doing it again KEP, stating different things on different days on huge efforts. On one hand, you want to reserve something to PrimeGrid level, which will be a multi-year CPU effort, and then on the other hand, you allow the fact that you have a few weeks on your current efforts to stop you? That is, to put it mildly, quite confusing.

Let me see if I have you down correctly now:
Riesel base 3 for k=250M-500M up to n=25K
Riesel base 3 for k<5M (2 k's) up to n=1M (!!)

The above is a tremendous amount of work for < 2 quads.

If you need some filler work to keep your machines busy, please take something smaller; perhaps some files from the Riesel and Sierp base 3 mini-drives.


Thanks,
Gary[/quote]

If it wasn't clear, I'm sorry, it all refers to some of the reasons earlier e-mailed to you. I suffered a setback this week, and also I forgot how much more work I've left. You've put my reservations right. Some status:

Riesel base 3 at k=~360M to n<=25000
Riesel base 3 k<=5M, still 2 k's remaining at n<=100K

Again I ask you to accept my appologize, it all refers to private reasons, and a matter of concentration aswell memory. Expect no more reservations (or at least just ignore them) within the next 6 months, since my intention is to wrap what is now reserved and then leave for at least a while.

Thanks for understanding, and good luck on your own challenges :smile:

gd_barnes 2008-10-23 01:19

[quote=KEP;146134]If it wasn't clear, I'm sorry, it all refers to some of the reasons earlier e-mailed to you. I suffered a setback this week, and also I forgot how much more work I've left. You've put my reservations right. Some status:

Riesel base 3 at k=~360M to n<=25000
Riesel base 3 k<=5M, still 2 k's remaining at n<=100K

Again I ask you to accept my appologize, it all refers to private reasons, and a matter of concentration aswell memory. Expect no more reservations (or at least just ignore them) within the next 6 months, since my intention is to wrap what is now reserved and then leave for at least a while.

Thanks for understanding, and good luck on your own challenges :smile:[/quote]


Thanks KEP for the detailed status on everything.

On Riesel base 3, those 2 k's were already at n=100K. I take it you haven't worked on that yet?


Gary

KEP 2008-10-23 03:45

[quote=gd_barnes;146216]Thanks KEP for the detailed status on everything.

On Riesel base 3, those 2 k's were already at n=100K. I take it you haven't worked on that yet?


Gary[/quote]

To answer your question: That's correct the 2 k's haven't been worked on yet!


KEP

KEP 2008-10-29 19:32

4223272*3^134986-1 is prime.

This means only 1 k to go :smile:

Now a quick question, for Gary:

The primes for Riesel base 3 for k<=500M for n<=500 are you interested in having those or will you rediscover those primes again, once you continue constructing or others continue constructing the proof for Riesel base 3 conjecture?

KEP!

gd_barnes 2008-10-29 20:36

[quote=KEP;147132]4223272*3^134986-1 is prime.

This means only 1 k to go :smile:

Now a quick question, for Gary:

The primes for Riesel base 3 for k<=500M for n<=500 are you interested in having those or will you rediscover those primes again, once you continue constructing or others continue constructing the proof for Riesel base 3 conjecture?

KEP![/quote]


Great find!

Thanks for the reminder on primes n>=500. Yes, please send those to me.

KEP 2008-10-30 15:29

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;147145]Great find!

Thanks for the reminder on primes n>=500. Yes, please send those to me.[/QUOTE]

OK I'll do. It will save you 20 days of work on a single core :smile:

KEP 2008-10-30 18:06

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;147145]Great find!

Thanks for the reminder on primes n>=500. Yes, please send those to me.[/QUOTE]

Ops... I just saw that you thought I reminded you of the primes where n is greater than 500, when in fact I was asking about your interest in getting the primes where n is less than or equal 500. So are you interested in those primes or will you find them yourself later on?

Sorry for askin again, especially if you made a typeo and in fact was answering my first question :smile:

KEP

gd_barnes 2008-10-31 08:09

[quote=KEP;147262]Ops... I just saw that you thought I reminded you of the primes where n is greater than 500, when in fact I was asking about your interest in getting the primes where n is less than or equal 500. So are you interested in those primes or will you find them yourself later on?

Sorry for askin again, especially if you made a typeo and in fact was answering my first question :smile:

KEP[/quote]

Oops. My bad. :smile:

I did misread your statement but the answer is the same:

Yes, go ahead and send me the primes for n<=500 if the files are not too big.


Thanks,
Gary

KEP 2008-10-31 14:27

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;147342]Oops. My bad. :smile:

I did misread your statement but the answer is the same:

Yes, go ahead and send me the primes for n<=500 if the files are not too big.


Thanks,
Gary[/QUOTE]

Well it will sum up to about 260MB of data (compressed)... but as soon as you've downloaded the data from your e-mail, you can delete the files, so only temporarily it will require a lot of space :smile:

Thanks for your answer, I'll now go ahead and start uploading the e-mails, to the draft folder, and as soon as the entire range is uploaded, I will e-mail all parts around the same time, to avoid misunderstandings or data losses :smile:

KEP

KEP 2008-11-11 18:28

[QUOTE=henryzz;148858]i dont know why i said sieving i meant primality proving
once my base 15 effort is finished to n=25k i will do 500000 ks from base 3 to n=25k
i have had a rather large gap between primes almost 1/3 of the range tested[/QUOTE]

Well then I think I've an answer to your previously question. Running 1M range (500,000 k's) to n<=25K, will take about 12 hours, if you only use OpenPFGW and starts out by doing some PRP testing at first, and eventually verifies the PRPs. So for administrative purpose i would suggest that you at least reserves 10M ranges or maybe 100M (dependent on the amount of cores you tent to put on this effort). I'm considering to launch an attack on a 1G range as soon as my Quad is done with the few important reservations she is working on :smile: This should take about 150 days from start to finish on the Quad (Q6600).

Also I may add, sieving is far more efficient from n>1000 (maybe n>2500) since trial division and factoring then starts to be to time demanding. But for the easyness of creating the proof later on, I'm considering to do it this way:

1. PRP test all k's reserved to n<1000
2. Sieve the k's remaining for n>1000 to n<=25000
3. PRP test all k's remaining in sieve file (for at most 1 prime per k)
4. Proof the PRP with n>1000
5. Proof the PRP with n<=1000
6. Release remaining k's to the public for further testing

This was my humble suggestions, but this seems to be the most efficient, however testing large ranges is with current technology bad, when talking about catching the PRP primes turning out to be actually composites. But the listed way, is the most effecient way and less risky of suffering various delaying setbacks. I've suffered many in my first 500M range, but a lot of new scripts has been developed and this really helps making it easier to go with large ranges.

Also a final notice, I've updated my Rb3a website, and Gary it appears that you've either one of your sites (the one with remaining k's) not updated or you have to many primes on your primelist. To crosscheck, I can mention that I've currently 215 primes listed and 973 k's remaining.

Regards

KEP

KEP 2008-11-11 21:04

[QUOTE=henryzz;148890]thanks i think i will reserve a 10M range when i have a core free then
i only have four cores so i tend to not use more than one occasionally two cores per type of work

i have just found another prime
1570340 21918[/QUOTE]

Welcome on board then... I think if you use sieving after n>1000 or maybe n>2500 that you might be able to do the entire range in 1-2 days in stead of 5 days... just a little trick I've learned during my many hick-ups while running the Riesel base 3 attack for k<=500M... I'm therefor really looking forward, now that I've learned from previous mistakes and setbacks, to see how fast a 1000M range in fact can be done on a Quad.

When you're done with your 10M range, you can just post your remaining k's and I'll add them to my website, aswell remove the k's that can be considered redundant. Hope to see you get just as addicted as I so we can complete level 1 (n<=25K) before the Moon expeditions starts again :smile: Anyone up for helping out besides Henryzz?

Regards

KEP

gd_barnes 2008-11-12 00:28

[quote=henryzz;148890]thanks i think i will reserve a 10M range when i have a core free then
i only have four cores so i tend to not use more than one occasionally two cores per type of work

i have just found another prime
1570340 21918[/quote]

OK, just tell me what k-range you want to reserve. You'd need to post it in the base 3 reservations/statuses thread.


Thanks,
Gary

gd_barnes 2008-11-12 00:30

[quote=KEP;148866]
Also a final notice, I've updated my Rb3a website, and Gary it appears that you've either one of your sites (the one with remaining k's) not updated or you have to many primes on your primelist. To crosscheck, I can mention that I've currently 215 primes listed and 973 k's remaining.

Regards

KEP[/quote]


Hum. I'll have to look up your website and see what the differences are. I balance k's remaining constantly with the mini-drives that are going on so I can't imagine it would be in the k-range that the mini-drives are processing unless either you or me is not totally up to date with the latest primes and k removal.


All times are UTC. The time now is 02:35.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.