- **Conjectures 'R Us**
(*https://www.mersenneforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=81*)

- - **Overall Project Progress**
(*https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=22170*)

Overall Project ProgressAs of April 1st 2017 the total overall progress is as follows:
563,674,901,215,566 Total Riesel k's to test (all bases) 142,501,532,757,170 Total Sierpinski k's to test (all bases) [B]706,176,433,972,736[/B] Total k's to test (both sides, all bases) 563,642,894,149,240 Untested Riesel k's (all not fully tested bases) 142,494,941,423,544 Untested Sierpinski k's (all not fully tested bases) [B]706,137,835,572,784[/B] Total untested k's (both sides, all not fully tested bases) 648,589 Remaining Riesel k's (all fully and partially tested bases) 186,421 Remaining Sierpinski k's (all fully and partially tested bases) [B]835,010[/B] Remaining k's (both sides, all fully and partially tested bases) [B]706,137,836,407,794[/B] Total k's remaining (both sides, untested+remaining k's) [B]38,597,564,942[/B] Total k's tested or primed 0.0054657112706% of k's tested or primed 99.9945342887294% of k's remaining untested or unprimed |

Stats that would be more relevant to track over the course of years than raw number of k's:
Number of bases proven Number of bases with 1 k remaining Number of bases with 2 k's remaining Perhaps number of bases with 10 or fewer k's remaining |

[QUOTE=VBCurtis;456000]Stats that would be more relevant to track over the course of years than raw number of k's:
Number of bases proven Number of bases with 1 k remaining Number of bases with 2 k's remaining Perhaps number of bases with 10 or fewer k's remaining[/QUOTE] We already have detailed stats for bases proven and bases with 1, 2, and 3 k's remaining: [URL]http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/crus/vstats_new/crus-stats.htm[/URL] [URL]http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/crus/tab/CRUS_tab.htm[/URL] I too think that the total number of k's remaining on the project is not very relevant. Although I have kept a few files from testing for S280, I don't plan to ever keep track of either R280 or S280 on the pages. There are a few other huge conjectures that I don't plan to track. I feel like KEP's statistic just encourages people to start huge bases. That is not a direction that I would like to see the project take. I would ask that people not start huge bases unless they plan to start them as part of their own side project. |

[QUOTE=KEP;455954]As of April 1st 2017 the total overall progress is as follows:
563,674,901,215,566 Total Riesel k's to test (all bases) 142,501,532,757,170 Total Sierpinski k's to test (all bases) [B]706,176,433,972,736[/B] Total k's to test (both sides, all bases) 563,642,894,149,240 Untested Riesel k's (all not fully tested bases) 142,494,941,423,544 Untested Sierpinski k's (all not fully tested bases) [B]706,137,835,572,784[/B] Total untested k's (both sides, all not fully tested bases) 648,589 Remaining Riesel k's (all fully and partially tested bases) 186,421 Remaining Sierpinski k's (all fully and partially tested bases) [B]835,010[/B] Remaining k's (both sides, all fully and partially tested bases) [B]706,137,836,407,794[/B] Total k's remaining (both sides, untested+remaining k's) [B]38,597,564,942[/B] Total k's tested or primed 0.0054657112706% of k's tested or primed 99.9945342887294% of k's remaining untested or unprimed[/QUOTE] I think that this is misleading. Are you taking into account k's that have trivial factors for bases that have not been started? If not, that would amount to a huge reduction in the number of k's remaining. Regardless this is mostly irrevelant. |

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;456020]We already have detailed stats for bases proven and bases with 1, 2, and 3 k's remaining:
[URL]http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/crus/vstats_new/crus-stats.htm[/URL] [URL]http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/crus/tab/CRUS_tab.htm[/URL] I too think that the total number of k's remaining on the project is not very relevant. Although I have kept a few files from testing for S280, I don't plan to ever keep track of either R280 or S280 on the pages. There are a few other huge conjectures that I don't plan to track. I feel like KEP's statistic just encourages people to start huge bases. That is not a direction that I would like to see the project take. I would ask that people not start huge bases unless they plan to start them as part of their own side project.[/QUOTE] I like the tracking method. Never or less we will reach these huge bases in the future. |

[QUOTE=rebirther;456024]I like the tracking method. Never or less we will reach these huge bases in the future.[/QUOTE]
The tracking method does not reduce the number of k's remaining for k's with trivial factors or algebraic factors on bases that have not been started. I say that because it would take a tremendous amount of time to get that figure exactly correct. So it is extremely misleading. KEP can you confirm that? Bases R280 and S280 and several other conjectures could not be solved in the entire life of the known universe even with exponentional increases in computing power or with quantum computers. That's because the number of digits in the size of the final prime would be greater than the number of electrons in the entire universe. I'm not talking actual size of the prime; I'm talking the number of digits in the size of the prime. Currently our largest known prime is over 20M digits. Primes for base 280 would have well over a googol (10^100) digits. In other words the actual prime would be well over a googolplex [10^(10^100)]. There's not enough power in the entire universe to solve it. It's pointless to start many of these bases. With the exception of bases 3/7/15, I do not plan to attempt to track any base with a conjecture > 1e9 on the pages. It is way too much effort. Others are welcome to track them as a side project and I can put a link to that project on the pages. I currently cringe when people start bases with conjectures > 1e6 now. Bases with over 10,000 k's remaining are a lot of admin effort. If someone wants to start a side project for bases with conjectures over 1e9 I'm very much in favor of it. |

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;456027]The tracking method does not reduce the number of k's remaining for k's with trivial factors or algebraic factors on bases that have not been started. I say that because it would take a tremendous amount of time to get that figure exactly correct. So it is extremely misleading. KEP can you confirm that?
Bases R280 and S280 and several other conjectures could not be solved in the entire life of the known universe even with exponentional increases in computing power or with quantum computers. That's because the number of digits in the size of the final prime would be greater than the number of electrons in the entire universe. I'm not talking actual size of the prime; I'm talking the number of digits in the size of the prime. Currently our largest known prime is over 20M digits. Primes for base 280 would have well over a googol (10^100) digits. In other words the actual prime would be well over a googolplex [10^(10^100)]. There's not enough power in the entire universe to solve it. It's pointless to start many of these bases. With the exception of bases 3/7/15, I do not plan to attempt to track any base with a conjecture > 1e9 on the pages. It is way too much effort. Others are welcome to track them as a side project and I can put a link to that project on the pages. I currently cringe when people start bases with conjectures > 1e6 now. Bases with over 10,000 k's remaining are a lot of admin effort. If someone wants to start a side project for bases with conjectures over 1e9 I'm very much in favor of it.[/QUOTE] It might be usefull to add on more admin to CRUS to focus on bases ck>1e6. That would reduce the amount of admin time for you. I did some testings on S280. Sofar I can see on S280 and S540 the prime density is rising on higher k-values. We can even see the same on S3. I might usefull to start any base with ck<1e6 before starting any other base. (exept 280) |

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;456027]The tracking method does not reduce the number of k's remaining for k's with trivial factors or algebraic factors on bases that have not been started. I say that because it would take a tremendous amount of time to get that figure exactly correct. So it is extremely misleading. KEP can you confirm that?
[/QUOTE] No this tracking method, does not remove the k's with trivial and algebraric factors, from the amount of untested k's. However it does remove the k's that you do not show on your website, from the number of remaining k's, from the fully started ranges (ranges=fully started conjecture or partially started and now shown on the CRUS website conjecture). Since srbsieve is not really using much effort to track down the trivially factored and GFN k's, I really don't see the harm in waiting for the day that all ranges are started, to have a statistics that does only show the k's remaining that actually requires quite an effort to remove from the overall total of k's remaining :smile: Well, since I solved my problems with accessing srbase (by using the new adress), I think I'll just post there for the future as I did for the past. It really doesn't seem like anyone here (who isn't able to find the stats at srbase website) bothers about these stats, so for the future I'll post an update at srbase website :smile: And no, this was not to encourage anyone to start big bases, it was what it is, just plain statistics on how much effort has been done and what remains to be done :smile: |

[QUOTE=VBCurtis;456000]Stats that would be more relevant to track over the course of years than raw number of k's:
Number of bases proven Number of bases with 1 k remaining Number of bases with 2 k's remaining Perhaps number of bases with 10 or fewer k's remaining[/QUOTE] Well, it was also available on the srbase advanced version of the overall project progress. I however need to recontruct my spreadsheet, so it actually isn't as time consuming to show how many conjectures remain with a given amount of k's remaining. Also I need to have a better spreadsheet created, to better know how many conjectures are tested to a given n :smile: I'm not sure, when, but it will happen over the next months, maybe around may 1st, you will again see the advanced stats returning to srbase. |

[QUOTE=KEP;456034]Well, it was also available on the srbase advanced version of the overall project progress. I however need to recontruct my spreadsheet, so it actually isn't as time consuming to show how many conjectures remain with a given amount of k's remaining. Also I need to have a better spreadsheet created, to better know how many conjectures are tested to a given n :smile:
I'm not sure, when, but it will happen over the next months, maybe around may 1st, you will again see the advanced stats returning to srbase.[/QUOTE] I´d like to see these stats here, too. :) |

[QUOTE]99.9945342887294% of k's remaining untested or unprimed [/QUOTE]
I find it very disappointing that after 9 years and about 200 million tests by me, that the above stat is true. Doesn't instill get up and go. I'd rather not know. |

All times are UTC. The time now is 07:04. |

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11

Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.