mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > PrimeNet

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2021-01-24, 17:46   #2080
James Heinrich
 
James Heinrich's Avatar
 
"James Heinrich"
May 2004
ex-Northern Ontario

62768 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lisanderke View Post
I seem to be able to manually submit my small ECM'ed assignments multiple times
.. has in some way added on to a tally of these curves being ran on those numbers.
Yes, it's possible since it's hard to authenticate whether a submitted result is a new set of results or the same result submitted again.
It will affect the number of future curves run at the current bounds (since the server now thinks the exponent has had more ECM factoring applied than it actually has). If you have a definitive list of which exact exponents you duplicate-submitted and how many extra curves you claimed but didn't actually run, you could PM this to George and he may wish to fiddle the database to make the correction (or not, at his discretion).
Please avoid duplicate ECM result submissions.
James Heinrich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-01-24, 18:01   #2081
Madpoo
Serpentine Vermin Jar
 
Madpoo's Avatar
 
Jul 2014

2·5·7·47 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gjmccrac View Post
Also in this section the values to do not balance

Code:
 240000000 52073    | 31277     1             20795 |                 3       | 20789     2     1       |
 241000000 51674    | 30940                   20734 |                         | 20731     2     1       |
 242000000 51625    | 31104                   20521 |                         | 15190     3     1       |
 243000000 51704    | 30772                   20932 |                 1       |  2535                   |
 244000000 52040    | 31187                   20853 |                         | 11963     4     1       |
 245000000 51723    | 30937                   20786 |                15       | 20757                   |
 246000000 51693    | 31308                   20385 |                         | 20308    76     1       |
 247000000 51695    | 31012                   20683 |                24       | 20640    18     1       |
 248000000 51780    | 31161                   20619 |                         | 20612     6     1       |
 249000000 51767    | 30860                   20907 |                         | 20895    11     1       |
 
----------=-----=-- | -----=-----=-----=-----=----- | -----=-----=-----=----- | -----=-----=-----=----- |
  Exponent Range    | Composite  | Status Unproven  |        Assigned         |        Available        |
   Start   Count  P |   F    DC  |LL/PRP  ERR NO-LL |  TF    P-1  LL/PRP  DC  |  TF    P-1  LL/PRP  DC  |
----------=-----=-- | -----=-----=-----=-----=----- | -----=-----=-----=----- | -----=-----=-----=----- |
I haven't checked the forums lately and wasn't aware there was an issue.

I'd guess these instances have something to do with the new certification work types being done, or something like that. It's something to look at when time allows.
Madpoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-01-24, 18:40   #2082
Madpoo
Serpentine Vermin Jar
 
Madpoo's Avatar
 
Jul 2014

CDA16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Madpoo View Post
I haven't checked the forums lately and wasn't aware there was an issue.

I'd guess these instances have something to do with the new certification work types being done, or something like that. It's something to look at when time allows.
Never mind the cert... I see these are for ranges much higher than the current assignment range for first-time checks.

And you're specifically referring to the "Available" counts (since the total-composite-noLL=0)

For example, for 242M there are 20521 with no LL (or PRP) done, so the # available should add up to that. That gives me something to look into... odds are they're probably available but as one of the obscure work types, and the report isn't showing those.
Madpoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-01-24, 18:48   #2083
lisanderke
 
Oct 2020
Belgium

7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Heinrich View Post
Yes, it's possible since it's hard to authenticate whether a submitted result is a new set of results or the same result submitted again.
It will affect the number of future curves run at the current bounds (since the server now thinks the exponent has had more ECM factoring applied than it actually has). If you have a definitive list of which exact exponents you duplicate-submitted and how many extra curves you claimed but didn't actually run, you could PM this to George and he may wish to fiddle the database to make the correction (or not, at his discretion).
Please avoid duplicate ECM result submissions.
Oh dear... I have turned in an awful amount of bogus results...
A small list of some of these exponents I accidentally over-submitted as new ECM curves:
https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...ll=1&ecmhist=1
https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...ll=1&ecmhist=1
https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...ll=1&ecmhist=1
https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...ll=1&ecmhist=1
https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...ll=1&ecmhist=1
https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...ll=1&ecmhist=1
lisanderke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-01-24, 18:50   #2084
lisanderke
 
Oct 2020
Belgium

1112 Posts
Default

It seems in total I have 606 counts of a bogus result submission (as in: any amount of submissions more than just the first time I clocked in the result.)


I'm able to pin-point every one of them in my results tab, sorting by ECM->only manual results. I'm not sure if I should print this page to pdf and attach it in an email or perhaps go through every single exponent and say that only 1 of the results for said exponents should be valid...


Edit: missed a plural form of a word :)

Last fiddled with by lisanderke on 2021-01-24 at 18:51
lisanderke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-01-24, 19:36   #2085
Madpoo
Serpentine Vermin Jar
 
Madpoo's Avatar
 
Jul 2014

2×5×7×47 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Madpoo View Post
Never mind the cert... I see these are for ranges much higher than the current assignment range for first-time checks.

And you're specifically referring to the "Available" counts (since the total-composite-noLL=0)

For example, for 242M there are 20521 with no LL (or PRP) done, so the # available should add up to that. That gives me something to look into... odds are they're probably available but as one of the obscure work types, and the report isn't showing those.
I think it comes down to some cleanup work George did, removing ancient TF assignments. They didn't seem to get re-added to the list of available exponents.

I'm running some cleanup now - it seems like it was mostly centered around some specific ranges where people had reserved a bunch of TF and then abandoned them, but there are a handful of others here and there. Could take a while to get them all sorted and then we'll see how it looks.
Madpoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-01-24, 20:43   #2086
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

467010 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lisanderke View Post
It seems in total I have 606 counts of a bogus result submission (as in: any amount of submissions more than just the first time I clocked in the result.)


I'm able to pin-point every one of them in my results tab, sorting by ECM->only manual results. I'm not sure if I should print this page to pdf and attach it in an email or perhaps go through every single exponent and say that only 1 of the results for said exponents should be valid...


Edit: missed a plural form of a word :)
Sounds like you have a lot of ECM work to do to make your reports accurate! :)
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-01-24, 22:22   #2087
Prime95
P90 years forever!
 
Prime95's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL

2×3×52×72 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lisanderke View Post
Oh dear... I have turned in an awful amount of bogus results...
I'm not overly concerned. The only negatives are 1) we switch to the next B1 bound a little earlier than we would have (and that's not necessarily a bad thing), and 2) you have some unearned CPU credit.

If you feel particularly guilty, you can turn off "Use Primenet" option, fill your worktodo.txt, and only report a factor if you find one.
Prime95 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-01-24, 23:29   #2088
lisanderke
 
Oct 2020
Belgium

7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime95 View Post
I'm not overly concerned. The only negatives are 1) we switch to the next B1 bound a little earlier than we would have (and that's not necessarily a bad thing), and 2) you have some unearned CPU credit.

If you feel particularly guilty, you can turn off "Use Primenet" option, fill your worktodo.txt, and only report a factor if you find one.

But wouldn't switching to the next bound earlier not mean we might (very slight chance I presume) have missed a factor in that bound?
lisanderke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-01-25, 01:44   #2089
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

467010 Posts
Default

I think your question means you don't understand ECM well. If an ECM curve would find a factor, increased bounds with the same sigma would also find the factor.

There's a slight loss in efficiency in running curves "too big" for a factor hunt, but not much. For example, if an input called for B1=50k curves but you ran curves at B1=100k, you improve your chances to find a bigger factor (say, 27-29 digits) at the expense of taking longer to find a 24-25 digit factor than you would expect to take running curves at B1=50k.

So, your false reports might trigger the next user to run curves at B1=250k sooner, but that's hardly a waste. I skip the 50k level entirely sometimes, such as my current work in 14.01M range.

Last fiddled with by VBCurtis on 2021-01-25 at 01:44
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-01-25, 02:06   #2090
James Heinrich
 
James Heinrich's Avatar
 
"James Heinrich"
May 2004
ex-Northern Ontario

CBE16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
I think your question means you don't understand ECM well.
Well explained, thank you. I'm sure there's many users here (myself especially included) who run this stuff for some fun without really understanding the math behind it, so simple explanations like that are wonderful.
James Heinrich is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Official "Faits erronés dans de belles-lettres" thread ewmayer Lounge 39 2015-05-19 01:08
Official "all-Greek-to-me Fiction Literature and Cinema" Thread ewmayer Science & Technology 41 2014-04-16 11:54
Official "Lasciate ogne speranza" whinge-thread cheesehead Soap Box 56 2013-06-29 01:42
Official "Ernst is a deceiving bully and George is a meanie" thread cheesehead Soap Box 61 2013-06-11 04:30
Official "String copy Statement Considered Harmful" thread Dubslow Programming 19 2012-05-31 17:49

All times are UTC. The time now is 09:32.

Fri Feb 26 09:32:03 UTC 2021 up 85 days, 5:43, 0 users, load averages: 1.85, 1.87, 1.83

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.