20170401, 08:54  #1 
Quasi Admin Thing
May 2005
2×7×67 Posts 
Overall Project Progress
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) 706,176,433,972,736 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) 706,137,835,572,784 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) 835,010 Remaining k's (both sides, all fully and partially tested bases) 706,137,836,407,794 Total k's remaining (both sides, untested+remaining k's) 38,597,564,942 Total k's tested or primed 0.0054657112706% of k's tested or primed 99.9945342887294% of k's remaining untested or unprimed Last fiddled with by KEP on 20170401 at 08:55 
20170402, 03:47  #2 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
4364_{10} Posts 
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 
20170402, 09:32  #3  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
23753_{8} Posts 
Quote:
http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/cru...crusstats.htm http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/crus/tab/CRUS_tab.htm 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. Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20170402 at 09:34 

20170402, 09:38  #4  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
11·929 Posts 
Quote:
Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20170402 at 09:38 

20170402, 09:42  #5  
Sep 2011
Germany
2,503 Posts 
Quote:


20170402, 10:07  #6  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
11×929 Posts 
Quote:
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. Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20170402 at 10:09 

20170402, 12:45  #7  
"Nuri, the dragon :P"
Jul 2016
Good old Germany
11·67 Posts 
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 kvalues. 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) 

20170402, 13:23  #8  
Quasi Admin Thing
May 2005
2×7×67 Posts 
Quote:
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 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 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 

20170402, 13:26  #9  
Quasi Admin Thing
May 2005
2×7×67 Posts 
Quote:
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. 

20170402, 14:09  #10  
"Nuri, the dragon :P"
Jul 2016
Good old Germany
11·67 Posts 
Quote:


20170403, 21:12  #11  
May 2008
Wilmington, DE
2^{2}×23×31 Posts 
Quote:


Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Progress  bsquared  YAFU  20  20140522 16:52 
Progress  R.D. Silverman  Factoring  0  20120522 14:03 
Special project #3b  Project 400  schickel  Aliquot Sequences  307  20111028 01:29 
Special project #3a  Project 300  schickel  Aliquot Sequences  29  20110812 17:45 
In Progress?  R.D. Silverman  Cunningham Tables  33  20100507 14:02 