mersenneforum.org > Data Let's finish DC of old "dubious" claims of primes
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2021-12-24, 20:43 #1 kriesel     "TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17" Mar 2017 US midwest 26·101 Posts Let's finish DC of old "dubious" claims of primes Of the roughly 90 "dubious" claims exponents, I have the following as not yet having a factor found, matching DC or TC, or PRP with proof & successful cert. Code: PRP=1,2,86225219,-1,76,0 PRP=1,2,87232913,-1,76,0 PRP=1,2,89023807,-1,76,0 PRP=1,2,96532433,-1,76,0 PRP=1,2,97970567,-1,76,0 PRP=1,2,103404713,-1,76,0 PRP=1,2,108575167,-1,77,0 PRP=1,2,110000017,-1,78,0 PRP=1,2,122628553,-1,78,0 PRP=1,2,137362691,-1,80,0 PRP=1,2,231695603,-1,79,0 PRP=1,2,276036017,-1,80,0 PRP=1,2,285754177,-1,80,0 PRP=1,2,315690521,-1,80,0 PRP=1,2,333333223,-1,81,0 PRP=1,2,369452123,-1,81,0 PRP=1,2,852348659,-1,86,0 Please reserve any you take on. PRP with GEC and proof generation would be preferable, since it is much more reliable and efficient than the other choices. Last fiddled with by kriesel on 2021-12-24 at 20:43
 2021-12-24, 21:35 #2 mathwiz   Mar 2019 22×5×13 Posts Why do these exponents deserve special attention, just because someone made a claim about them? (in other words: don't feed the trolls).
 2021-12-24, 23:15 #3 Uncwilly 6809 > 6502     """"""""""""""""""" Aug 2003 101×103 Posts 101001000011012 Posts Those from the "Guess Mxx" threads should usually be taken with 10g NaCl crystals.
2021-12-25, 01:40   #4
tuckerkao

"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020

2×5×73 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Uncwilly Those from the "Guess Mxx" threads should usually be taken with 10g NaCl crystals.
How about raise the trial factoring depth 2~3 bits higher than the recommended levels, maybe double the P-1 bounds.

2021-12-25, 01:52   #5
kriesel

"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest

26·101 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Uncwilly Those from the "Guess Mxx" threads
Overlap is rare.
M852348659 appeared elsewhere and was classified as a dubious claim first, before someone entered it in the predict m52 thread, so it is not counted again in the predict m52 total.
I found no other overlap between my dubious claim DC list in post 1 and the predict-Mxx lists on my server share (M45, M49, M50, M51, M52).
Predict Mn guesses are not counted again if reused in Mo (o>n) guesses, in the counts I occasionally update.
Quote:
 with 10g NaCl crystals.
If usual table use size, that is a LOT of grains of salt. If softener salt, still quite a few.

Last fiddled with by kriesel on 2021-12-25 at 02:15

2021-12-25, 02:11   #6
tuckerkao

"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020

10110110102 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by mathwiz Why do these exponents deserve special attention, just because someone made a claim about them?
If it's like a horse race and all users have gotten only 3 active guesses. Unless they on-purposely enter the bad guesses(such as has a known factor, ridiculously large), the final answers to their declarations should be worked on further if Kriesel grants them. The only oversized exponent seems to be M852348659, other entries are valid and looks okay.

A horse can only be declared lost if the result is a certified composite. In addition, there are barely around 90 of them, not 9,000.

Maybe UncWilly should add this rule to the Mxx thread, exponent guesses must not be greater than 4x the size of the exponent of the current largest known Mersenne Prime or 3x the size of the exponent of the current wavefront milestone, whichever one is larger, but it's up to UncWilly to decide.

A lot of complains have been generated because someone places down a large guess in the M800M+ or M900M+ ranges which will take around a year or 2 to test the exponent, there can be an easy fix to this. Is this what you've meant the trolls?

Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 2021-12-25 at 03:08

 2021-12-25, 03:07 #7 retina Undefined     "The unspeakable one" Jun 2006 My evil lair 23×5×7×23 Posts There is no obligation to test exponents the others have suggested. So there are no grounds for complaints IMO. If you want to test them then go ahead. Else leave it to the person suggesting to test their own exponents. If you don't like the their suggestion then just ignore it and carry on with whatever are your own preferred exponents.
2021-12-25, 10:50   #8
Zhangrc

"University student"
May 2021
Beijing, China

2×53 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by tuckerkao How about raise the trial factoring depth 2~3 bits higher than the recommended levels, maybe double the P-1 bounds.
By finding a factor to prove that they are really wrong?

2021-12-25, 11:22   #9
tuckerkao

"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020

2×5×73 Posts

M89023807 which is the 3rd exponent on Kriesel's list was already certified from the PRP branch although LL wasn't verified yet.

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Zhangrc By finding a factor to prove that they are really wrong?
That's more of ViliamF's way because he has better graphic cards.

 2021-12-25, 12:54 #10 kriesel     "TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17" Mar 2017 US midwest 26·101 Posts I'm running PRP=1,2,86225219,-1,76,0 on gpuowl on a Radeon VII, which should take ~16 hours. Can't register it because of the old LLDC reservation lingering for years. Last fiddled with by kriesel on 2021-12-25 at 12:56
2021-12-27, 23:11   #11
kriesel

"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest

11001010000002 Posts
Updated list

Most of these I did a first test on, so the server won't issue DC to me.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by kriesel Of the roughly 90 "dubious" claims exponents, I have the following as not yet having a factor found, matching DC or TC, or PRP with proof & successful cert. Please reserve any you take on. PRP with GEC and proof generation would be preferable, since it is much more reliable and efficient than the other choices.
Code:
PRP=1,2,87232913,-1,76,0
PRP=1,2,96532433,-1,76,0 I have reserved this one
PRP=1,2,97970567,-1,76,0
PRP=1,2,103404713,-1,76,0
PRP=1,2,108575167,-1,77,0
PRP=1,2,110000017,-1,78,0
PRP=1,2,122628553,-1,78,0 I have reserved this one
PRP=1,2,231695603,-1,79,0
PRP=1,2,276036017,-1,80,0
PRP=1,2,285754177,-1,80,0
PRP=1,2,315690521,-1,80,0
PRP=1,2,333333223,-1,81,0 I have reserved this one
PRP=1,2,369452123,-1,81,0
PRP=1,2,852348659,-1,86,0

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post sweety439 Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5 1 2020-12-21 14:08 Uncwilly Lounge 15 2020-04-14 18:35 wildrabbitt Miscellaneous Math 11 2015-03-06 08:17 Batalov And now for something completely different 12 2014-11-16 19:03 nitai1999 Software 7 2004-08-26 18:12

All times are UTC. The time now is 05:59.

Mon May 16 05:59:20 UTC 2022 up 32 days, 4 hrs, 0 users, load averages: 1.32, 1.36, 1.31