mersenneforum.org Sieving for CRUS
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

2015-12-25, 06:25   #23
wombatman
I moo ablest echo power!

May 2013

1,847 Posts
S/R373

Here is S373 and R373 taken to P=20e12.
Attached Files
 sr_373_20e12.zip (10.2 KB, 368 views)

2015-12-25, 15:29   #24
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter

"name field"
Jun 2011
Thailand

2×47×109 Posts

S428 k=8, up to n=1M sieved to 3e13 (or 30T). This means deep sieved. Finding a factor actually went much slower that the cllr went, at that depth. So, either my cllr is too fast, or my sr1sieve is too slow (read: I am doing something wrong, with the speeds I get I would stop somewhere at 15T-18T or so), but I still followed what people suggested, to go to 30T.

Additional in the zip, there is a double check of S428, as high as it could go during the sieving process in a parallel core, which I used for speed comparison (about n=180k), which may be needed by Gary or not.

Manual edit can be done on the sieve file to split the range, and eventually sieve the higher range higher (pun intended).

There is also a "sandbox" folder where I tried - without success - to find a reasonable prime for k=2 and k=4. Strange or not, there is no other prime to (about) n=110k (see the files), beside of the trivial known primes.

The file can be deleted by a mod, to save my quota of uploading space, when it was taken by the interesting parts (for Boinc and by Gary for DCs).
Attached Files
 S428_sieve.ZIP (308.8 KB, 375 views)

Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2015-12-25 at 15:31

2015-12-25, 19:03   #25
VBCurtis

"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

126708 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by LaurV S428 k=8, up to n=1M sieved to 3e13 (or 30T). This means deep sieved. Finding a factor actually went much slower that the cllr went, at that depth. So, either my cllr is too fast, or my sr1sieve is too slow (read: I am doing something wrong, with the speeds I get I would stop somewhere at 15T-18T or so), but I still followed what people suggested, to go to 30T.
I may have goofed the sieve-depth estimate! If the file is 500k to 1M, the time per factor should be about twice as long as the time to LLR a 500k candidate. This accounts for the longer testing times as you proceed toward 1M. If the file goes lower than 500k, the usual heuristic is to find LLR time for a candidate about 2/3rds of the way through the file, and sieve until factor time matches that LLR time; so, if you have 100k to 1M, you'd measure LLR for a candidate around 700k. These estimates assume the same machine will sieve and LLR.

Sorry if my previous guesses caused you to oversieve- just think of the time you saved the BOINCers!

 2015-12-26, 03:41 #26 LaurV Romulan Interpreter     "name field" Jun 2011 Thailand 2×47×109 Posts It wasn't any sort of complaint. This is how we learn. I was only wondering if my method is the right one or not, or if I was using the right tools. I also sieved 200k-300k strictly, and I could get about ~55M pps (primes per second) while all the range to 1M gave me about ~43M pps. So I let it run with all range. Also, these times were with P95 stopped. When P95 runs, they get to about a bit more than half. This can be seen in the result files where occasional stop/run of other programs (including p95) makes the testing time per each n to jump to double or to half. Somewhere in the middle of the DC result file there is a test for a n=200k for speed comparison, I let it there and added a comment, hope this does not make the automatic parser dizzy.
 2015-12-31, 06:29 #27 gd_barnes     May 2007 Kansas; USA 1157310 Posts I received another batch of sieve files from Ian. This time specifically for n=25K-100K. There are now links to all of them on the pages. They are as follows: Code: R225 R442 R445 R451 R943 S225 S442 S445 S451 S943
 2016-01-04, 08:01 #28 gd_barnes     May 2007 Kansas; USA 71·163 Posts Another batch received from Ian again for n=25K-100K. There are links to all of them on the pages. They are as follows: Code: R222 R249 R287 R693 S96 S231 S282 S391 S640 S843 S940
 2016-01-10, 22:08 #29 gd_barnes     May 2007 Kansas; USA 2D3516 Posts Another batch received from Ian again for n=25K-100K. There are links to all of them on the pages. They are as follows: Code: R145 R215 R591 R738 R742 R757 R971 S616 S742 S757 S971
 2016-02-04, 09:23 #30 gd_barnes     May 2007 Kansas; USA 71·163 Posts Another batch received from Ian again. This time for n=50K-100K. There are links to all of them on the pages. They are as follows: Code: R52 R147 R168 R192 R262 R270 R292 R393 R477 S95 S105 S108 S143 S147 S247 S955 (50K-75K) S1027 Because it has so mank k's remaining, S955 is only sieved for n=50K-75K. Quite a few of these bases have a lot fewer k's remaining than a lot of bases searched to n=25K and so would be considered higher priority. Only two of the bases are > 500 so most of them should be fairly easy, especially for BOINC, to search for n=50K-100K.
 2016-02-04, 09:55 #31 gd_barnes     May 2007 Kansas; USA 264658 Posts Another batch of 20 more bases for n=25K-100K as follows: Code: R658 R723 R751 R771 R843 R858 R897 R903 R1027 R1030 S106 S205 S215 S277 S313 S316 S336 S351 S366 S498
2016-02-04, 17:45   #32
rebirther

Sep 2011
Germany

2·1,669 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by gd_barnes Another batch received from Ian again. This time for n=50K-100K. There are links to all of them on the pages. They are as follows:
wow, a big thx to Iain, thats a lot for the future. I will add soon some of these 50-100k ranges :)

 2016-02-09, 00:45 #33 gd_barnes     May 2007 Kansas; USA 71·163 Posts Another batch of 23 more bases for n=25K-100K as follows: Code: R336 R355 R466 R502 R568 R576 R595 R642 R646 R750 R852 R918 R973 S555 S568 S598 S642 S658 S663 S733 S751 S771 S808

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post gd_barnes Conjectures 'R Us 143 2014-10-21 23:55 vmod Conjectures 'R Us 213 2014-02-28 21:23 rogue Conjectures 'R Us 35 2013-11-09 09:03 CRGreathouse Puzzles 24 2011-10-28 18:30 Mini-Geek Conjectures 'R Us 1 2010-11-08 20:50

All times are UTC. The time now is 19:36.

Thu Dec 8 19:36:34 UTC 2022 up 112 days, 17:05, 0 users, load averages: 0.86, 0.99, 1.04