mersenneforum.org > Math 3-tuples and 4-tuples
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2020-12-31, 08:53 #1 MattcAnderson     "Matthew Anderson" Dec 2010 Oregon, USA 2×5×67 Posts 3-tuples and 4-tuples Hi all, Prime Constellations are a special case of k-tuples. I had my computer do 3 calculations for k-tuples with patterns [0,2,6]; [0,4,6] and [0,2,6,8] These are for The Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences. I extend the tables from 1,000 to 10,000 numbers. prime constellations with 3 numbers http://oeis.org/A022004 http://oeis.org/A022005 prime constellations with 4 numbers http://oeis.org/A007530 Right now, the OEIS is judging my .b files. Wish me luck. Matt
 2020-12-31, 09:16 #2 Batalov     "Serge" Mar 2008 Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2 221658 Posts But why? Thomas Nicely's tables from 1999 had shown billions of quads. Why extend it to 10000? Code:  Table 1. Counts of prime quadruplets and estimates of Brun's B_4 constant. ====================================================================== x pi_4(x) delta_4(x) S_4(x) F_4(x) ====================================================================== 10 1 10.29 0.510689310689311 0.964070321217938 100 2 11.60 0.789976586880612 0.846649213196690 1000 5 11.49 0.853473194253130 0.870265083531968 10000 12 12.17 0.863733192400183 0.870817270689693 10^05 38 14.88 0.867011003684134 0.870638051768363 10^06 166 17.68 0.868379532753497 0.870478518913352 10^07 899 -36.05 0.869267876960829 0.870589687487152 10^08 4768 -33.36 0.869705293632323 0.870590803418512 10^09 28388 8.84 0.869966856425087 0.870588778250229 10^10 180529 545.93 0.870134891176928 0.870588272187457 10^11 1209318 638.22 0.870247695545365 0.870588327409023 10^12 8398278 -3699.97 0.870326020813441 0.870588394083423 10^13 60070590 4848.36 0.870382016088034 0.870588379770569 10^14 441296836 -6103.68 0.870423153466140 0.870588379781931 2.0e+14 807947960 2717.36 0.870433368925933 0.870588379517423 3.0e+14 1151928827 -12660.14 0.870438957019776 0.870588379757893 4.0e+14 1482125418 -15032.60 0.870442759816539 0.870588379787802 5.0e+14 1802539207 -23557.26 0.870445621161320 0.870588379871401 6.0e+14 2115416076 -35177.17 0.870447903679533 0.870588379961704 7.0e+14 2422194981 -49882.89 0.870449795732922 0.870588380059497 8.0e+14 2723839871 -35301.69 0.870451407176393 0.870588379983029 9.0e+14 3021126140 -38141.52 0.870452807976233 0.870588379996686 1.0e+15 3314576487 -26197.22 0.870454044834374 0.870588379948604 1.1e+15 3604646822 -19485.07 0.870455150797010 0.870588379922608 1.2e+15 3891706125 -36034.00 0.870456149967533 0.870588379981021 1.3e+15 4175985018 -18182.67 0.870457060200978 0.870588379923299 1.4e+15 4457782901 -24552.75 0.870457895584737 0.870588379943262 1.5e+15 4737286827 -38254.45 0.870458666969910 0.870588379980055 1.6e+15 5014641832 -29496.94 0.870459383002448 0.870588379958289 ====================================================================== Computing 10000 triplets or quads on the fly would be likely faster than fetching it from internet.
 2020-12-31, 09:59 #3 MattcAnderson     "Matthew Anderson" Dec 2010 Oregon, USA 10100111102 Posts Hi again, Extending the tables from 1,000 to 10,000 potentially makes it more useful for other people. It may be easy for you to calculate these numbers, but it may be difficult for some people. You may have seen my webpage on prime constellations - https://sites.google.com/site/primeconstellations/ Regards, Matt
 2020-12-31, 10:05 #4 Batalov     "Serge" Mar 2008 Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2 221658 Posts Even so, quad table in compressed form is already available in A014561 above 10,000 terms. (with "5" easily added in front). Triplet tables will take less than a split second to compute. It is like expanding A008585 to 10,000 terms. Or A008596. There are so many more sequences that can be extended!
2020-12-31, 17:25   #5
MattcAnderson

"Matthew Anderson"
Dec 2010
Oregon, USA

67010 Posts

Attached is the simple minded code that I used to calculate 10,000 terms of the prime constellation with 4 primes.

Here is a link to a constellation with 12 primes in OEIS.org
http://oeis.org/A213645
I used more complicated code to calculate these as fast as possible.

As computing power increases and becomes cheaper, we will be able to extend these tables. This interesting mathematical trivia may be useful in the future.

Regards,
Matt
Attached Files
 4 tuple simple.pdf (282.2 KB, 21 views)

 2020-12-31, 18:41 #6 Batalov     "Serge" Mar 2008 Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2 100100011101012 Posts The computational power becomes cheaper. The storage price doesn't, - it remains relatively flat. What's more, storage price compounds, it is what OEIS will continue paying continuously year after year. This is exactly why sequences that cost less than a second to compute should be kept virtual. Every sequence contains "PROG" section. -- A cooking recipe that can be run to make a cake. Or a pizza. Why do pizza shops make pizzas on order? Why don't they make 10,000 of them and store them? "What if someone needs 10,000 pizzas at once?" Some sequences are like pizza. Having a 100 terms (with a stretch, ok, a 1000) is useful for the "search" function, but more is wasteful. Some sequences are like diamonds: they have e.g. 11 terms and computing the 12th will take a skilled person a month and an unskilled person forever. Those are of value and have a special keyword: "more". A good rule of thumb: If a sequence doesn't have keyword "more" (or even more so, has "easy"!), then it doesn't need more terms!
2021-01-18, 15:43   #7
JeppeSN

"Jeppe"
Jan 2016
Denmark

A616 Posts

The official policy of OEIS disagrees.

Quote:
 Question: Is there a rule of thumb for which sequences we want b-files for? Amswer: Pretty much any sequence - the b-files are always useful. Question: I would think that sequences that are too simple (like the odd numbers) would be excluded. Answer: No, even the odd numbers have a b-file (useful for plotting one sequence against another, for example). Question: what size of b-file is acceptable? Answer: 100, 1000, 10000, 20000 terms are usual. But remember that the numbers cannot have more than about 1000 digits, or some of the programs will fail.
So just because it is faster to calculate a sequence than to fetch it over the internet, does not mean you should not submit the b-file.

/JeppeSN

 2021-01-18, 17:01 #8 Batalov     "Serge" Mar 2008 Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2 32×17×61 Posts I don't see a contradiction here. This talks about "please send us b-files" meaning where there are none. It also says 100 terms is just fine to have. Useful for plotting. They said it, and I said it. They didn't say, "just for vanity purposes, extend the b-file of odd numbers from 10,000 terms to 20,000 terms".
 2021-01-19, 22:31 #9 MattcAnderson     "Matthew Anderson" Dec 2010 Oregon, USA 2·5·67 Posts For 3 tuples and 4 tuples we only need to consider divisibility by 2 and 3. We do not need to bother with divisibility by 5. So 3 tuples and 4 tuples can be all prime numbers if all the numbers are congruent to 1 or 5 modulo 6. We say that x is relatively prime to 6 if and only if x is congruent to 1 or 5 mod 6. Regards Matt

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post jzakiya Miscellaneous Math 57 2020-10-24 14:20 MattcAnderson Math 0 2020-06-16 17:45 Puzzle-Peter Software 156 2019-06-03 20:19

All times are UTC. The time now is 01:00.

Mon Mar 8 01:00:28 UTC 2021 up 94 days, 21:11, 1 user, load averages: 2.74, 2.45, 2.32