mersenneforum.org 62.8 trillion digits of Pi - GWR
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

2020-11-20, 07:01   #34
ATH
Einyen

Dec 2003
Denmark

2×7×229 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus Hmm, rings a bell.That girl has problems, bein' heard ain't one of 'em .-- Ethel Merman, referring to Janis Joplin
He was probably refering to:
Got 99 problems and a bitch ain't one
- Ice-T 1993

2020-12-03, 15:52   #35
mackerel

Feb 2016
UK

44010 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by storm5510 Y-Cruncher seems to prefer vast amounts of swap/storage space on drives over lot of RAM.
Only just saw this, forgot this forum was here. Y-cruncher would love as much ram as is needed, but in reality no consumer attainable system can possibly have enough ram for the bigger runs. We're talking well into the TB that not even high end servers can reach. And that's putting aside the cost of that much ram even if you could put it in a single system. So the practicality of it is, you have to use some form of swap as a less insane cost substitute, and that is where the optimisation needs to go.

 2020-12-03, 15:57 #36 Xyzzy     Aug 2002 100000101011002 Posts To prove that you computed x digits of pi, couldn't you store only a checksum of all of the digits and keep the last digit "for fun"?
2020-12-03, 16:32   #37
xilman
Bamboozled!

"πΊππ·π·π­"
May 2003
Down not across

3·13·283 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Xyzzy To prove that you computed x digits of pi, couldn't you store only a checksum of all of the digits and keep the last digit "for fun"?
Don't see why not. Computing the last digit is much cheaper than computing them all.

2020-12-05, 14:28   #38
Xyzzy

Aug 2002

100000101011002 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by xilman Don't see why not. Computing the last digit is much cheaper than computing them all.
Would the NT community accept the last digit and a checksum as a record? (Say you ran it twice with a different algorithm each time and both checksums matched.)

 2020-12-05, 16:58 #39 Uncwilly 6809 > 6502     """"""""""""""""""" Aug 2003 101Γ103 Posts 2×32×563 Posts The last 10 digits and a 128 bit check-sum would be enough, I would suppose.
 2020-12-05, 17:10 #40 retina Undefined     "The unspeakable one" Jun 2006 My evil lair 189E16 Posts Digit extraction algorithms exist. So merely producing a few trailing digits wouldn't be enough to prove you computed all the digits up to that point. A hash of all digits up to your claimed last digit would be suitable IMO.
2020-12-05, 18:08   #41
R. Gerbicz

"Robert Gerbicz"
Oct 2005
Hungary

24·5·19 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Xyzzy Would the NT community accept the last digit and a checksum as a record? (Say you ran it twice with a different algorithm each time and both checksums matched.)
Quote:
 Originally Posted by retina Digit extraction algorithms exist. So merely producing a few trailing digits wouldn't be enough to prove you computed all the digits up to that point.
There is no BBP type formula for Pi in base ten [though there could be], https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bailey...louffe_formula .
But even giving only the last few bits would enable to provide a fake proof, just give the exact bits from BBP and give a trash hash value. [notice that even giving say hundred consecutive bits of Pi is "easy"].

Much better: if you're claiming a world record then I would choose 1 million random positions and you should give the bits for each of these positions. The check: select say 20-25 positions and verify the bits with BBP. You have an extremely small probability to fake me. This is assuming that when you need multiple bits of Pi then there is no faster method than to use the BBP formula for each position.

 2020-12-07, 07:41 #42 LaurV Romulan Interpreter     "name field" Jun 2011 Thailand 22×11×223 Posts Group the bytes by 32 or 64 and compute a SHA256 or SHA512 of it. I don't believe anybody would contest that.
2020-12-07, 14:05   #43
R. Gerbicz

"Robert Gerbicz"
Oct 2005
Hungary

24×5×19 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by LaurV Group the bytes by 32 or 64 and compute a SHA256 or SHA512 of it. I don't believe anybody would contest that.
So you would accept any(?) hash value as a proof, say claiming 256T digits of Pi, and giving only sha256 as:
Code:
a19a6c3a75783b6b5deee64777873ae207764837e769eedbe9b4c485d94b2986

Last fiddled with by R. Gerbicz on 2020-12-07 at 14:05 Reason: typo

 2020-12-08, 07:01 #44 LaurV Romulan Interpreter     "name field" Jun 2011 Thailand 265416 Posts Yep. After I remake the calculus to see if I get the same value... I assume somebody verifies this things, anyhow... Or not? Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2020-12-08 at 07:03

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post mersenneNoob Operation Billion Digits 11 2021-06-02 07:37 Mysticial y-cruncher 30 2019-10-11 14:45 davar55 Puzzles 36 2015-12-18 15:47 kokakola Information & Answers 23 2009-11-03 05:08 davar55 Puzzles 5 2007-06-18 15:06

All times are UTC. The time now is 04:26.

Thu Dec 9 04:26:14 UTC 2021 up 138 days, 22:55, 0 users, load averages: 1.11, 1.46, 1.45