Prime-Wiki

[storm5510]

The one caveat about this database is that anyone with a password can edit anything. I found an entry I did not make in one of my k's which I was finishing up, k = 10207. The entry is for n = 980,083, which is prime. It was not in the list because I had not tested up to the next multiple of 100e3 above it. I stopped using "HistF" because of the length using it could add to the history. Running a large Nash k would probably do this.

So, if anyone in authority decides to add to, remove from, or change, anything I have put up, please let me know so I will not think I am going insane.

[kar_bon]

So where do you see a problem here?

Sure every logged in user can edit any page, but as admin I have to mark as checked every edit, so any 'spam' will be spotted.

Any edit can be watched in the page history (see link 'View history' on top right of any page) and the edits and username is shown (for that k-value here).

The 'page information' (left menu bottom) shows a page length of 616 bytes, so no serious worry about it.
For the history entries of such values see for example k=337: by now there're 108 entries/lines of history and the page length is 5713 bytes, also no worry here.

If the history entries of such page will climb to say 100 kBytes, that history can be changed like this: create a text file (CSV formatted) and show those data in a table.
An example can be seen here: the data table is done from a saved file (~30 kByte) although the page itself is ~5 kByte.

The new entry for n=980053 of k=10207 contains also the source of your find, so the reference is given and more informative.
Any Top5000 prime will get a HistF entry, smaller ones can be listed only in the list, because the finder is mentioned in the reservation of the history.
So the prime for n=133 here is not worth a HistF entry, but the above is.

If there's any external (from the Wiki) reference available, that is a helpful information to be shown.

Keep in mind:
I see and have to mark reviewed any edit first, otherwise I can undo any change then.
If any registered user will do any spam/harm/damage he/she will be warned and/or banned!

[Happy5214]

As the person who added the HistF entry in question, I really don't see a problem here. I often do "drive-by" updates to the Prime-Wiki when I see updates posted in the RPS forum.

My personal opinion is that only Karsten can claim ownership of the Prime-Wiki pages, since he owns the wiki, and that any constructive edit to any page is fair game, regardless of reservation status.

[storm5510]

Originally Posted by kar_bon

So where do you see a problem here?

The new entry for n=980053 of k=10207 contains also the source of your find, so the reference is given and more informative.

Any Top5000 prime will get a HistF entry, smaller ones can be listed only in the list, because the finder is mentioned in the reservation of the history.
So the prime for n=133 here is not worth a HistF entry, but the above is.

I did not see this as a Top 5000 result because the 5,000th item in the list I looked at just minutes ago has 449,323 digits. The list goes to 5,768 items. I understand the contents, but not the relevance of having those there.

Where is the cutoff for a Top 5000 result, if not more digits than the 5,000th entry?

[paulunderwood]

Originally Posted by storm5510

I did not see this as a Top 5000 result because the 5,000th item in the list I looked at just minutes ago has 449,323 digits. The list goes to 5,768 items. I understand the contents, but not the relevance of having those there.

Where is the cutoff for a Top 5000 result, if not more digits than the 5,000th entry?

This is a list of the top20s.

This gives the thresholds.

[storm5510]

Originally Posted by paulunderwood

This is a list of the top20s.

This gives the thresholds.

Interesting. Riesel must be mixed in somewhere. I do not see it specifically listed as such. Several different types use the Riesel form, k*2^n-1.

[kar_bon]

Riesel type primes are not listed separately in the Top20, but Proth primes do.

To get into the Top5000 with a Riesel prime, the n-value has currently be >~1.5 M (a higher k-value makes only small difference).

The 'smallest' Riesel prime in the Top5000 is 1287*2^1493088-1 ranked 4993 with 449,468 digits, so only a few days to fall out of the Top5000 list.

[storm5510]

Originally Posted by kar_bon

Riesel type primes are not listed separately in the Top20, but Proth primes do.

To get into the Top5000 with a Riesel prime, the n-value has currently be >~1.5 M (a higher k-value makes only small difference).

The 'smallest' Riesel prime in the Top5000 is 1287*2^1493088-1 ranked 4993 with 449,468 digits, so only a few days to fall out of the Top5000 list.

I saw Proth. There does not seem to be much interest in this type here, not that I have seen.

I have a link in my browser to the Top 5000 list, which is basically the same as the one quoted above. Just different pages on the same web site. I have always gone by the rule-of-thumb provided by the formula that calculates the number of digits in any Base 2 exponential form. Multiplying by 0.30103 gets it close enough. The bottom end would stay in the neighborhood of 450,000 digits. My result from earlier was 295,030 digits. Thus my confusion about why it was noted in the first place.

I have never tried to run an n to 1,500,000. Most of the "high-horsepower" CPU guys do. I always felt it would take too much time. On the other had, I read a while back where someone here had been working on the same k for 11 years, I believe it was. That would be something for an older computer sitting in a garage and only being looked at once in a great while. At my fairly advanced age, I would not consider trying such a thing.

[Happy5214]

Originally Posted by storm5510

I saw Proth. There does not seem to be much interest in this type here, not that I have seen.

I have a link in my browser to the Top 5000 list, which is basically the same as the one quoted above. Just different pages on the same web site. I have always gone by the rule-of-thumb provided by the formula that calculates the number of digits in any Base 2 exponential form. Multiplying by 0.30103 gets it close enough. The bottom end would stay in the neighborhood of 450,000 digits. My result from earlier was 295,030 digits. Thus my confusion about why it was noted in the first place.

I have never tried to run an n to 1,500,000. Most of the "high-horsepower" CPU guys do. I always felt it would take too much time. On the other had, I read a while back where someone here had been working on the same k for 11 years, I believe it was. That would be something for an older computer sitting in a garage and only being looked at once in a great while. At my fairly advanced age, I would not consider trying such a thing.

"Riesel prime" is really an abuse of nomenclature, as most places outside of the Riesel prime-searching community don't really seem to recognize them as their own type, like Proth primes are.

Your reported prime is nowhere close to Top 5000-range, but since it was individually reported in a forum post, I felt it was worth including.

Just a guess, but I think you might be referring to Jean Penné's k=138847, which he's tested to about n=11.5M. He actually took that k over around the start of 2015, and he's tested the entire range (including a double-check of the range below the second prime).

[kar_bon]

No, it was Riesel k=25 (see here).
Borys found his first prime of this k-value in 2006 and I don't think he used the same computer since then for his calculations. It's more about a passion in prime searching, because the second last prime was from 2008. This k is not that low weighted but the gap is quite big here.

[storm5510]

Originally Posted by kar_bon

No, it was Riesel k=25 (see here).
Borys found his first prime of this k-value in 2006 and I don't think he used the same computer since then for his calculations. It's more about a passion in prime searching, because the second last prime was from 2008. This k is not that low weighted but the gap is quite big here.

Wow! There is a lot of history with this one, but it is all spread out over time. Around two months just by taking a quick glance. That is passion, and dedication.

Originally Posted by Happy5214

"Riesel prime" is really an abuse of nomenclature, as most places outside of the Riesel prime-searching community don't really seem to recognize them as their own type, like Proth primes are.

Your reported prime is nowhere close to Top 5000-range, but since it was individually reported in a forum post, I felt it was worth including.

I will stick with the 450,000 digit floor and leave it go at that. Doing a reciprocal on the number of digits formula says this would be an n of 1,494,867.

About the database: I would much rather pick up a k which already exists and needs more attention rather than start a new one. 10673 was tested to n = 25,000. I reserved it.