Sorry, I can't made base 290 quickly. This base is hard for my computer.
I releasing this base. Again sorry Prethanks 
1 Attachment(s)
Reserving base 6 from 120k to 150k.
Also, I am posting the sieve file for base 50 from 100k to 120k (it is sieved to 12 T). It should be ready to go for PRP/prime testing. 
2 Attachment(s)
I'm wondering why no searches were done for n>1K for bases 56 and 58.
I ran both bases myself for n=1 to n=2500. The web page is correct for all n<=1000. I found 4 additional primes for n=10002500. Attached are all of the primes that I found. Here are the 4 new primes: (56^16981)^22 (58^17201)^22 (58^1734+1)^22 (58^2354+1)^22 I would like to search the bases to n=10K but I could not make cksieve work on my machine. So I just trialfactored in PFGW for the above. Every time I ran cksieve at the command prompt, I got a Windows error message as follows: [code] cksieve.exe has stopped working A problem caused the program to stop working correctly. Windows will close the program and notify you if a solution is available. [/code]My machine is 64bit, the O.S. is Windows 7, and there is 4 GB RAM. It is an Intel I7 running @ 2.67 Ghz. I have checked and even temporarily disabled my AntiVirus to make sure it wasn't being blocked. Has anyone else had problems running cksieve? 
[QUOTE=gd_barnes;477247]I'm wondering why no searches were done for n>1K for bases 56 and 58.
I ran both bases myself for n=1 to n=2500. The web page is correct for all n<=1000. I found 4 additional primes for n=10002500. Attached are all of the primes that I found. Here are the 4 new primes: (56^16981)^22 (58^17201)^22 (58^1734+1)^22 (58^2354+1)^22 I would like to search the bases to n=10K but I could not make cksieve work on my machine. So I just trialfactored in PFGW for the above. Every time I ran cksieve at the command prompt, I got a Windows error message as follows: [code] cksieve.exe has stopped working A problem caused the program to stop working correctly. Windows will close the program and notify you if a solution is available. [/code]My machine is 64bit, the O.S. is Windows 7, and there is 4 GB RAM. It is an Intel I7 running @ 2.67 Ghz. I have checked and even temporarily disabled my AntiVirus to make sure it wasn't being blocked. Has anyone else had problems running cksieve?[/QUOTE] Hi Gary, thanks for joining. I do not know why cksieve is crashing. This is the first that I've heard of anyone having such a problem. Does it crash immediately? What command line arguments are you passing? Can you build from source? 
[QUOTE=rogue;477261]Hi Gary, thanks for joining.
I do not know why cksieve is crashing. This is the first that I've heard of anyone having such a problem. Does it crash immediately? What command line arguments are you passing? Can you build from source?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=gd_barnes;477247]I'm wondering why no searches were done for n>1K for bases 56 and 58. I ran both bases myself for n=1 to n=2500. (snip) I would like to search the bases to n=10K but I could not make cksieve work on my machine. So I just trialfactored in PFGW for the above. Every time I ran cksieve at the command prompt, I got a Windows error message as follows: [code] cksieve.exe has stopped working A problem caused the program to stop working correctly. Windows will close the program and notify you if a solution is available. [/code]My machine is 64bit, the O.S. is Windows 7, and there is 4 GB RAM. It is an Intel I7 running @ 2.67 Ghz. I have checked and even temporarily disabled my AntiVirus to make sure it wasn't being blocked. Has anyone else had problems running cksieve?[/QUOTE] I was able to run this on cksieve with no problem. Windows 10 command prompt, version 1.1.4. 
[QUOTE=rogue;477261]Hi Gary, thanks for joining.
I do not know why cksieve is crashing. This is the first that I've heard of anyone having such a problem. Does it crash immediately? What command line arguments are you passing? Can you build from source?[/QUOTE] Yes it crashes immediately. It doesn't matter how I run it or what command line arguments that I give it. I've tried running it both at the command prompt with correct command line arguments (using exactly what you stated on your web page) and without command line arguments at all. I've tried just pressing enter on the file name. I've tried rightclicking on it and choosing "run as administrator". All attempts crash immediately. I run all versions of sr(x)sieve on this same machine with no problem so I'm very surprised. To check the machine, I just now downloaded the latest version of srsieve. It runs fine. You would have to give me instructions on building from source. I've never done that. This is my only Windows machine. Do you have a Linux version? Edit: Here is the command line arguments that I give it: cksieve P1e9 n1 N1e5 b56 
[QUOTE=gd_barnes;477291]Yes it crashes immediately. It doesn't matter how I run it or what command line arguments that I give it. I've tried running it both at the command prompt with correct command line arguments (using exactly what you stated on your web page) and without command line arguments at all. I've tried just pressing enter on the file name. I've tried rightclicking on it and choosing "run as administrator". All attempts crash immediately.
I run all versions of sr(x)sieve on this same machine with no problem so I'm very surprised. To check the machine, I just now downloaded the latest version of srsieve. It runs fine. You would have to give me instructions on building from source. I've never done that. This is my only Windows machine. Do you have a Linux version? Edit: Here is the command line arguments that I give it: cksieve P1e9 n1 N1e5 b56[/QUOTE] There is a makefile. It will build for Linux, Mac, and Windows (mingw64) using that makefile. Use "make" from a command prompt after you cd to the directory with the source. 
[QUOTE=rogue;477296]There is a makefile. It will build for Linux, Mac, and Windows (mingw64) using that makefile. Use "make" from a command prompt after you cd to the directory with the source.[/QUOTE]
Make or Makefile are not executables so trying to execute them does not work. When I type "make" or "makefile" at the command prompt it just says: [code] 'make' is not recognized as an internal or external command, operable program or batch file. [/code] What does "mingw64" mean? I have not compiled C programs in Windows/Linux before so you are going to have to be very basic here. 
1 Attachment(s)
Gary,
Here is cksieve compiled for Linux using a generic corei7 arch (meaning it should work for pretty much any corei7 processor). Can you see if this works for you? Edit: Just to add, it works for me under the Win10 Ubuntu linux shell. 
[QUOTE=wombatman;477308]Gary,
Here is cksieve compiled for Linux using a generic corei7 arch (meaning it should work for pretty much any corei7 processor). Can you see if this works for you? Edit: Just to add, it works for me under the Win10 Ubuntu linux shell.[/QUOTE] Well none of my Linux machines are I7's. lol I'll try it though. Thanks. ...too many complications these days. Ugh. 
1 Attachment(s)
[QUOTE=gd_barnes;477309]Well none of my Linux machines are I7's. lol I'll try it though. Thanks.
...too many complications these days. Ugh.[/QUOTE] If you can tell me what they are, I can recompile as appropriate :smile: Actually, here's the most generic 64bit compilation. So try this one if the other doesn't work. 
[QUOTE=wombatman;477314]If you can tell me what they are, I can recompile as appropriate :smile:
Actually, here's the most generic 64bit compilation. So try this one if the other doesn't work.[/QUOTE] Thank you! Unfortunately the first one didn't work and gave two error messages. The second generic version did not work either but only one error message was issued. For the generic version, here is a copyandpaste of the command that I issued and the error message: [code] gary@herford:~/Desktop/Prime/prime/cksieve$ ./cksieve P10e6 n1 N10e3 b56 ./cksieve: /lib/libm.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.15' not found (required by ./cksieve) gary@herford:~/Desktop/Prime/prime/cksieve$ [/code]Here are my Linux CPU specs: [code] processor : 0 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 15 model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz stepping : 11 cpu MHz : 2400.000 cache size : 4096 KB [/code]Essentially an older Intel quadcore Q6600 running at 2.4 Ghz. Edit: I'm running an old Ubuntu O.S. I feel like this may not work. I think a Windows version that is compatible with my I7 would be better. I really don't want to have to get into upgrading O.S.'s. 
1 Attachment(s)
Lucky for you I'm taking tomorrow off from work, so here's a Windows version compiled with the generic x8664 GCC flags. Try it out and see if it works for you. :smile:

[QUOTE=wombatman;477317]Lucky for you I'm taking tomorrow off from work, so here's a Windows version compiled with the generic x8664 GCC flags. Try it out and see if it works for you. :smile:[/QUOTE]
Excellent! It works! Thank you! :grin: Perhaps Mark could post this more generic version on his site. :smile: Mark, I will reserve bases 56 and 58 to n=10K. I'll post primes in the other thread. 
[QUOTE=gd_barnes;477318]Excellent! It works! Thank you! :grin:
Perhaps Mark could post this more generic version on his site. :smile: Mark, I will reserve bases 56 and 58 to n=10K. I'll post primes in the other thread.[/QUOTE] Very welcome! :tu: 
[QUOTE=gd_barnes;477299]Make or Makefile are not executables so trying to execute them does not work. When I type "make" or "makefile" at the command prompt it just says:
[code] 'make' is not recognized as an internal or external command, operable program or batch file. [/code] What does "mingw64" mean? I have not compiled C programs in Windows/Linux before so you are going to have to be very basic here.[/QUOTE] mingw64 is an application which give you access to many of the unix command line programs that you are familiar with from Linux, such as grep and diff. It also has gcc/g++, a compiler for C/C++ code. make is another program that is bundled with mingw64 that will build libraries or executables using a makefile, which has the switches and other settings needed to build said library/executable. mingw64 is free to d/l and install and everything that comes with it is free to use. You just need to add mingw64's bin directory to the PATH environment variable. For your Linux distro you would need to install the packages that include make and gcc/g++ then you can build. 
[QUOTE=wombatman;477317]Lucky for you I'm taking tomorrow off from work, so here's a Windows version compiled with the generic x8664 GCC flags. Try it out and see if it works for you. :smile:[/QUOTE]
I assume you modified the makefile. Let me know what compile and link switches you used I would guess that you removed "march=native". In most of my software I avoid using march as much as possible as it reduces crossplatform compatibility, but not in cksieve as I started with a makefile used by another program. I will eventually make that multithreaded and when I do it will not use that switch. 
[QUOTE=rogue;477327]I assume you modified the makefile. Let me know what compile and link switches you used I would guess that you removed "march=native". In most of my software I avoid using march as much as possible as it reduces crossplatform compatibility, but not in cksieve as I started with a makefile used by another program. I will eventually make that multithreaded and when I do it will not use that switch.[/QUOTE]
I changed from "native" to "x8664" as that appeared to be the most generalized 64bit flag I could use. That was the only change and it compiled under MinGW and the Win10 Ubuntu bash shell without any other modification needed. The GLIBC error Gary got appears to be due to using the older version of Ubuntu. From a quick search around, it seems that one simply can't get the appropriate version of GLIBC unless you compile it yourself for the older distros. Edit: And I set the ARCH flag to x8664, not sse. 
Base 56 is complete to n=10K; 3 new primes were found for n=100010K; base released.
Base 58 is complete to n=10K; 3 new primes were found for n=100010K; base released. Reserving base 202 to n=10K. 
Base 202 is complete to n=10K; 11 new primes were found for n<=10K; base released.
All bases <= 204 are now complete to n=10K. :) 
For historical reference:
All bases shown on the primes page have been doublechecked to n=2500. Base 22 has been doublechecked to n=10K. PRP tests have been run on primes n>2500 for all bases. All corrections have been made. This includes all bases <= 204, 214, 218, 220, 222, 228, 252, 278, 290, 316, 326, 640, 688, 720, 1656, 1968, 2010, 2026, 2264, 2482, and 2634. 
Reserving base 34 to n=30K.
I will doublecheck it to n=10K. 
1 Attachment(s)
Base 34 is complete to n=30K. No primes were found for n=10K30K.
This was unexpected. It is the largest primeless gap for b<38 and n<=30K. It is a fairly heavy weight base and the last prime was at n=8093. For that reason I'm attaching results. Base 34 was also doublechecked to n=10K. No problems found. 
[QUOTE=gd_barnes;478215]Base 34 is complete to n=30K. No primes were found for n=10K30K.
This was unexpected. It is the largest primeless gap for b<38 and n<=30K. It is a fairly heavy weight base and the last prime was at n=8093. For that reason I'm attaching results. Base 34 was also doublechecked to n=10K. No problems found.[/QUOTE] Don'e forget, the bases b<38 include bases 4, 8, 16, 32 and 36, although they are not shown in the webpage. 
Reserving base 22 to n=30K.
I will doublecheck it to n=22K 
[QUOTE=sweety439;478258]Don't forget, the bases b<38 include bases 4, 8, 16, 32 and 36, although they are not shown in the webpage.[/QUOTE]
I did not forget them. The prime gap that I pointed out for b=34 is still the largest for b<38 and n<=30K. This includes both sides combined for each base. 
206, 208, 210, and 212 reserved Jiahao He via email

Base 22 is complete to n=30K. No primes were found for n=22K30K.
Base 22 was also doublechecked to n=22K. No problems found. All bases <= 40 are now complete to n>=30K. :smile: 
Base 26 was doublechecked to n=30K. No problems found.
Doublecheck status: Base 22 to n=22K. Base 26 to n=30K. Base 34 to n=10K. All other bases shown on primes page to n=2500. 
Reserving base 42 to n=30K.
I will doublecheck it to n=10K. 
Base 42 is complete to n=30K. 2 primes were found for n=10K30K. Base released.
[B]Base 42 and 44[/B] were also doublechecked to n=10K. No problems found. 
Reserving base 46 to n=30K.
I will doublecheck it to n=10K. Reserving base 2026 to n=10K. I will doublecheck it to n=5526. Filling in the search holes. :smile: 
Gary has graciously taken over the coordination of this search. Please go to [URL="http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/CarolKyneaprimesearch.htm"]this page[/URL] to view the current status.

Base 2026 is complete to n=10K. No primes were found for n=552710K.
Base 2026 was also doublechecked to n=5526. No problems found. 
I was looking to those tables and saw that after 222 or so, the bases are not contiguous. I assume there is no search done for the missing bases, and the "higher" values just come from "people with a hobby" and not from an organized search. Because, unless I am not missing anything, I see no reason why the missing bases would not give primes. I think they do, and it should be no reason to jump from 222 to 228 (therefore missing 224 and 226) or from 2010 to 2026.
Now, the introduction done, for a week or so we were looking for an opportunity to test the new "multithreaded" tool from Mark (i.e. mtsieve). We picked CK numbers, and we picked the base 2018. As the current year, you know? We could not make the toy run in multithreaded mode (this is subject for another thread), but we got hooked :blush: and let it run overnight to sieve (single thread) and test with pfgw with some batch file. In the morning we had few (small) primes, and pfgw was close to testing n=12k or so. Does it make any sense reporting it? Or we are really missing the point (again, it won't be the first time, hehe). 
I'm working on CK base 3602000, n=11024 to get a point to start of (some smaller bases later filled). For now only the [b]least[/b] n (n<=1024) for bases 11024 were evaluated and Batalov's search gave no list.
The PFGWscript looks like this: [code] ABC2 ($b^$a1)^22  ($b^$a+1)^22 a: from 1 to 1024 b: from 360 to 2000 step 2 [/code] My search for CK44 is currently at n=72k, continuing to 100k, new PRP (44^60212+1)^22 found so far. 
[QUOTE=LaurV;480022]I was looking to those tables and saw that after 222 or so, the bases are not contiguous. I assume there is no search done for the missing bases, and the "higher" values just come from "people with a hobby" and not from an organized search. Because, unless I am not missing anything, I see no reason why the missing bases would not give primes. I think they do, and it should be no reason to jump from 222 to 228 (therefore missing 224 and 226) or from 2010 to 2026.
Now, the introduction done, for a week or so we were looking for an opportunity to test the new "multithreaded" tool from Mark (i.e. mtsieve). We picked CK numbers, and we picked the base 2018. As the current year, you know? We could not make the toy run in multithreaded mode (this is subject for another thread), but we got hooked :blush: and let it run overnight to sieve (single thread) and test with pfgw with some batch file. In the morning we had few (small) primes, and pfgw was close to testing n=12k or so. Does it make any sense reporting it? Or we are really missing the point (again, it won't be the first time, hehe).[/QUOTE] That is correct. If you do not see a base listed, it has not been tested. There are plenty of "base holes" to fill so feel free to reserve and test some if you would like. I'm happy to hear that you guys are working on the multithreaded version of cksieve. Mark had previously asked that people only reserve and report bases if you intend to test them to n>=10K. I would like to stick with that requirement so as to not have a lot of admin work for small tests. So if you have a base that you have tested to n=12K, yes please report its results. 
[QUOTE=kar_bon;480028]I'm working on CK base 3602000, n=11024 to get a point to start of (some smaller bases later filled). For now only the [B]least[/B] n (n<=1024) for bases 11024 were evaluated and Batalov's search gave no list.
The PFGWscript looks like this: [code] ABC2 ($b^$a1)^22  ($b^$a+1)^22 a: from 1 to 1024 b: from 360 to 2000 step 2 [/code][/QUOTE] Do as you please but something like this has already been done twice before now; by both Serge and Sweety. Serge's effort was done in 2016. I feel like you are reinventing the wheel a 2nd time here. :) You'll need to reserve a specific base to n=10K for me to show it on the page. 
I know of those post and as mentioned, both of them gave no list of all primes upto n=1024, only the first one to this bound or higher ones if none was found then.
They invented the wheel perhaps, but gave no complete instructions for a whole wheel. 
base 6 update
Base 6 is at n = 124223. No new primes have been found yet, and I am continuing to n = 150k.

Base 46 is complete to n=30K. No primes were found for n=10K30K. Base released.
Base 46 was also doublechecked to n=10K. One missing prime was found and already reported. Reserving base 48 to n=30K. I will doublecheck it to n=10K. 
I have attached two available sieve files to the first post of this thread. Thanks to Dylan for pointing them out. We will use that method for the time being for making them easily accessible. If they become too numerous we will look to add a column to the main status page.

Reserve 362, 364, 368, 394, 426 and 472 to n=10K.

Base 48 is complete to n=30K. 4 primes were found for n=10K30K. Base released.
Base 48 was also doublechecked to n=10K. No problems found. All bases <= 50 are now complete to n>=30K. :) 
Jiahao He has completed bases 206, 208, 210, and 212 to n=10K. Primes reported in other thread. He is releasing these bases.
All bases <= 256 are now complete to n>=10K. :smile: 
1 Attachment(s)
I have attached here a sieve file for base 290 for the n range of 20k to 30k. It is sieved up to 2.1 T and should be ready to go for PRP/prime testing.
After I complete a reservation for factorizing a repdigitrelated number, I will create some more sieve files. If possible Gary, could you tell me what bases and nranges are most wanted? 
[QUOTE=Dylan14;481117]I have attached here a sieve file for base 290 for the n range of 20k to 30k. It is sieved up to 2.1 T and should be ready to go for PRP/prime testing.
After I complete a reservation for factorizing a repdigitrelated number, I will create some more sieve files. If possible Gary, could you tell me what bases and nranges are most wanted?[/QUOTE] Thanks! I'd say a good starting point for some sieve files would be bases 52, 54, 56, and 58 for n=10K30K. I feel like P=300G would be sufficient. Although these bases are only searched to n=10K, all other bases around them have already been searched to n=30K. 
Reserving CK290 for n>20k.
Reserving CK362 for n>10k. 
[QUOTE=sweety439;480926]Reserve 362, 364, 368, 394, 426 and 472 to n=10K.[/QUOTE]
All of these bases are completed to n=10K, primes reported in other thread, bases released. Bases 364 and 368 have Carol prime found, and base 426 has Kynea prime found. Bases 362, 394 and 472 still have no Carol prime found. 
[QUOTE=gd_barnes;481132]Thanks!
I'd say a good starting point for some sieve files would be bases 52, 54, 56, and 58 for n=10K30K. I feel like P=300G would be sufficient. Although these bases are only searched to n=10K, all other bases around them have already been searched to n=30K.[/QUOTE] The number that I am factoring has entered LA, so I will reserve bases 52, 54, 56 and 58 for sieving, from n=10k to n=30k. 
1 Attachment(s)
The nrange of 10k30k has been sieved for bases 52, 54, 56, and 58 up to p = 500G, which was when the time to remove a factor became longer than the time needed to test any candidate in the files. They are included in the 7zipped file attached in this post.
Reserving base 10, n = 100k to 200k, for sieving. 
[QUOTE=Dylan14;481571]The nrange of 10k30k has been sieved for bases 52, 54, 56, and 58 up to p = 500G, which was when the time to remove a factor became longer than the time needed to test any candidate in the files. They are included in the 7zipped file attached in this post.
Reserving base 10, n = 100k to 200k, for sieving.[/QUOTE] Thanks Dylan. I have added the files to the first post in this thread. 
Reserving base 52 to n=30K.
I will doublecheck it to n=10K. 
Base 52 is complete to n=30K. 2 primes were found for n=10K30K. Base released.
Base 52 was also doublechecked to n=10K. No problems found. 
ck update 3/11
1 Attachment(s)
Base 6 is at n = 130207. No new primes have been found yet, and I am continuing to n = 150k.
Base 10 sieving is at p = 1.05 T. Goal is to get the sieve file sieved up to p = 10 T or so (maybe less depending on the time per factor). Lastly I have two more sieve files: base 14 for n = 30k to 50k (sieved to 1.2 T) and base 18 for n = 40k to 50k (sieved to 2 T). Both files are attached in the 7 zipped file in this post. As an aside, when these files have been fully tested, all bases <= 20 will have been searched to n >= 50k. 
[QUOTE=Dylan14;482116]
Lastly I have two more sieve files: base 14 for n = 30k to 50k (sieved to 1.2 T) and base 18 for n = 40k to 50k (sieved to 2 T). Both files are attached in the 7 zipped file in this post. As an aside, when these files have been fully tested, all bases <= 20 will have been searched to n >= 50k.[/QUOTE] +1!! :smile: 
Reserving base 54 to n=30K.
I will doublecheck it to n=10K. 
Reserving CK14 for n=30k  50k (using sieve from post #1) and sieving n=50k  100k, too.

Base 54 is complete to n=30K. 1 prime was found for n=10K30K. Base released.
Base 54 was also doublechecked to n=10K. No problems found. 
CK44 complete to n=100k and releasing.
No further primes. 
Reserving base 56 to n=30K.

Base 56 is complete to n=30K. 1 prime was found for n=10K30K. Base released.
Reserving base 58 to n=30K. 
Base 58 is complete to n=30K. 2 primes were found for n=10K30K. Base released.
All bases <= 100 are now complete to n>=30K. :smile: 
ck update 4/11
Base 6 is at n = 137720. No primes have been found, and I am continuing to n = 150k.
Base 10 sieve is at p = 2.75 T; progress has been quite slow due to the large n range. The target sieve depth is still 10 T. 
CK14 tested to n=100k, new prime
(14^506031)^22 (115996 digits) found and releasing 
1 Attachment(s)
Base 12 for n = 50k  100k has been sieved to 10 T. The sieve file is attached below:

While doing more sieving for FermatSearch, I took base 2 from 750,000 to 760,000. No new primes. Continuing.

Reserving base 18 to n = 50k.

ck update 5/12
Base 6  no change in the n value since the last status update.
Base 10 sieve is at p = 4.85 T, current time to remove a factor is 1575 sec, which is slightly more than a third of the time needed to test the largest candidate in the file (~1 h 4 min). Base 18 is approaching n = 44k, one prp has been found. I will report it once the range is complete. 
Info
CK 290 at n=71k
CK 362 at n=65k 
Base 6 has been searched up to n = 150k. No primes were found from n = 120k to 150k. I am releasing this base.
The reservation for base 18 should be done tomorrow. 
Base 18 has been searched to n = 50k. One prime was found and reported for n = 40k50k. I am releasing this base.
All bases <= 20 have been searched to n >= 50k. 
Status
CK290 at n=80k
CK362 at n=73k No new primes, continuing. 
Reserving base 472 to n = 25k.

1 Attachment(s)
Base 10 for n = 100k  200k has been sieved to 21 T. The sieve file is attached below. 10013 candidates remain after sieving.

Reserving base 26 for n = 8423990000
Greetings to rogue Jiahao He aka Grotex 
Base 472 is complete to n = 25k. Three primes were found and reported for n = 10k25k. I am extending my reservation of this base to n = 50k.

Info
CK 290 at n=92k
CK 362 at n=83k Continuing. 
Base 472 is complete to n = 50k. No primes were found from n = 25k50k. I am releasing this base.

Reserving CK12 from n=50k to 100k.

Reserving base 102 from n = 10k to 30k.

Base 102 is complete to n = 30k. One prime found and reported for n = 10k30k. I am releasing this base.
Reserving base 104 to n = 30k. 
Base 104 is complete to n = 30k. No primes were found for n = 10k30k. I am releasing this base.

Reserving base 6, n = 150k to 250k, for sieving.
Also, it has been awhile since rogue and Grotex have made their reservations, and we haven’t heard anything yet. 
[QUOTE=Dylan14;497966]Reserving base 6, n = 150k to 250k, for sieving.
Also, it has been awhile since rogue and Grotex have made their reservations, and we haven’t heard anything yet.[/QUOTE] I have written a couple of PM to Grotex in the last 2 weeks, related to a Fermatsearch reservation, and had no answer whatever... :sad: 
[QUOTE=Dylan14;497966]Reserving base 6, n = 150k to 250k, for sieving.
Also, it has been awhile since rogue and Grotex have made their reservations, and we haven’t heard anything yet.[/QUOTE] I have the ranges sieved and they are on hiatus as I help the GFN divisor project. If someone wants to work on them, I can provide files. 
Status
CK12 at n=87k
CK290 at n=107k CK362 at n=91k 
[QUOTE=rogue;498010]I have the ranges sieved and they are on hiatus as I help the GFN divisor project. If someone wants to work on them, I can provide files.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Dylan14;497966]Reserving base 6, n = 150k to 250k, for sieving. Also, it has been awhile since rogue and Grotex have made their reservations, and we haven’t heard anything yet.[/QUOTE] I will release Mark's and Grotex's reservations. 
CK 12
CK 12 completed to n=100k and releasing
2 primes found and reported 
[QUOTE=kar_bon;498774]CK 12 completed to n=100k and releasing
2 primes found and reported[/QUOTE] What are the two primes? They are not in [URL="https://www.rieselprime.de/Others/CarolKynea.htm"]https://www.rieselprime.de/Others/CarolKynea.htm[/URL] 
[QUOTE=sweety439;498778]What are the two primes? They are not in [URL="https://www.rieselprime.de/Others/CarolKynea.htm"]https://www.rieselprime.de/Others/CarolKynea.htm[/URL][/QUOTE]
I guess it's about time I found out what these critters are. <rummage rummage> There is a most recent update on 20181016 by [b]kar_bon[/b] for base 12 at [url=http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/CarolKyneaprimesearch.htm]Carol and Kynea Prime Search[/url]. I'm guessing the two largest ones are the newest. These would be (12^68835  1)^2  2 and (12^78858 + 1)^2  2. 
Reserving base 2 for n > 760k.

[QUOTE=Dylan14;499676]Reserving base 2 for n > 760k.[/QUOTE]
I'll provide the files later this week as I am away from home. 
[QUOTE=rogue;499682]I'll provide the files later this week as I am away from home.[/QUOTE]
This file is for Dylan14. It is only the n/c that haven't been tested below 1000000. You can easily generate the first line for base 2 using cksieve. 
Thanks for the sieve file rogue. By the way, the start of the file is at 765831. Did you test the numbers between n=760k and the start of the file, or is that a gap that I will need to fill in?

[QUOTE=Dylan14;500048]Thanks for the sieve file rogue. By the way, the start of the file is at 765831. Did you test the numbers between n=760k and the start of the file, or is that a gap that I will need to fill in?[/QUOTE]
As I stated these are the only candidates that haven't been tested, so anything below the n in the file was either removed by sieving or by testing. 
ck update 11/12
Base 2 is at n = 765831. No primes have been found yet, continuing.
Base 6 sieve is at p = 22.25 T. I will sieve this to 60 T, this should be done before the next monthly update. 
All times are UTC. The time now is 19:07. 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000  2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.