question about k weights

drakkar67 · 2006-01-02, 23:11

Hi,
I was searching the prime sierpinski basic stats pages. There seems k=258317 is the heaviest remaining k. But when I look at the "total untested" column, there are many k's heavier than this. Is there a foult in the table? Or aren't the k weights updated according to sieve results?

drakkar

Citrix · 2006-01-03, 00:01

You can read more about weights. http://pages.prodigy.net/chris_nash/psieve.html

It is basically number of candidates left after sieving to 10000. (starting with a range of 10000)

It doesnot correlate with primes or anything, mostly a rough estimate of how much work each k needs.(Though the estimate doesnot always match the real thing)

Hope this helps!

Citrix

2006-01-02, 23:11	#1
drakkar67 Feb 2003 Istanbul 52₁₀ Posts	question about k weights Hi, I was searching the prime sierpinski basic stats pages. There seems k=258317 is the heaviest remaining k. But when I look at the "total untested" column, there are many k's heavier than this. Is there a foult in the table? Or aren't the k weights updated according to sieve results? drakkar

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Why Base 5 and Weights	Citrix	Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5	18	2016-03-05 23:41
better k weights	Mini-Geek	Conjectures 'R Us	1	2010-12-06 17:23
N Weights	Mini-Geek	Conjectures 'R Us	4	2010-04-17 09:57
Small k weights	paulunderwood	Riesel Prime Search	2	2006-09-11 06:46
Weights and measures	mfgoode	Puzzles	12	2006-02-03 06:22

2006-01-03, 00:01	#2
Citrix Jun 2003 1,579 Posts	You can read more about weights. http://pages.prodigy.net/chris_nash/psieve.html It is basically number of candidates left after sieving to 10000. (starting with a range of 10000) It doesnot correlate with primes or anything, mostly a rough estimate of how much work each k needs.(Though the estimate doesnot always match the real thing) Hope this helps! Citrix