mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > New To GIMPS? Start Here! > Information & Answers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2020-12-01, 23:43   #1
ONeil
 
Dec 2017

24×3×5 Posts
Question Completion Date Question?


Current date: December 1, 2020
I just downloaded and am using the latest software!

Well based on my digital root theory I picked a number which indicated to me a chance to be Mprime and the number no one has factored here at Mersenne Org. I believe it is a un-tested number, because I checked it out and it had no factors. I'm currently testing it as I type. I have a question about the completion date as it is a PRP World Record number if found to be Mprime. The number does not have that many digits.

I tweaked my Semiprime & Prime Generator with (2**p-1) and I believe that the exponent numbers that end with 3 are special which produce Mprimes and also its the only 3 in the number. You will have to do some research with the code to see what I see for the digital root for the production exponent prime number.

Back to my Question I know I'm an odd ball

The report says it will finish February 24, 2023.

My question is, will I at least know anything about the number before 2/24/23 which would hint that the number could be an Mprime if it is?

Is there a quick test prior to the completion date that would set off a bios alarm like in 6 weeks or a month from now if the trial factoring finds no factors and therefore Mprime?


Well with more research others have attempted this number but quit it. no factors though.
The underline one is my result just in:
NF no factor from 2^72 to 2^73
___________________________
NF no factor from 2^71 to 2^72
NF no factor from 2^70 to 2^71
NF no factor from 2^69 to 2^70
NF no factor from 2^68 to 2^69
NF no factor from 2^67 to 2^68
NF no factor from 2^66 to 2^67
NF no factor from 2^65 to 2^66
NF no factor from 2^64 to 2^65
NF no factor from 2^63 to 2^64

Last fiddled with by ONeil on 2020-12-02 at 00:01
ONeil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-01, 23:57   #2
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

460410 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ONeil View Post
if the trial factoring finds no factors and therefore Mprime?
Trial factoring is not how a prime is discovered. You can run all the trial factoring you want on your candidate, and the info you gain does not meaningfully change the chance your candidate is prime.

Until the prp test is complete, you have no information about primality- if anything else were the case, why would we run the prp test at all?
Do you have the patience and discipline to spend over 2 years on a single task? Can you assign a faster machine to the task to reduce that time? 2 years is far far longer than most machines would take. Maybe you have the wrong software, too.
VBCurtis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-02, 01:02   #3
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

23×31×37 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
Can you assign a faster machine to the task to reduce that time? 2 years is far far longer than most machines would take. Maybe you have the wrong software, too.
Maybe the OP does not understand that the numbers being run are not a factoring of the exponent, but of the whole Mersenne Number.

For the OP's info:
M104023427 that is 2104023427-1 has 31,314,172 decimal digits and requires 414.18 GHz-Days of work to complete the PRP test.
M332,192,897 has 100,000,027 decimal digits and takes about 4,941 GHz-days of work to test.
M999,999,937 has 301,029,977 decimal digits and took about 47,431 GHz-days of work to test.

So, maybe you don't understand the size of the number your exponent represents.
Uncwilly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-02, 01:30   #4
ONeil
 
Dec 2017

24·3·5 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncwilly View Post
Maybe the OP does not understand that the numbers being run are not a factoring of the exponent, but of the whole Mersenne Number.

For the OP's info:
M104023427 that is 2104023427-1 has 31,314,172 decimal digits and requires 414.18 GHz-Days of work to complete the PRP test.
M332,192,897 has 100,000,027 decimal digits and takes about 4,941 GHz-days of work to test.
M999,999,937 has 301,029,977 decimal digits and took about 47,431 GHz-days of work to test.

So, maybe you don't understand the size of the number your exponent represents.
I know this is another ignorant question.

What does 1 GHz-day equal in actual time? Is it 1Ghz-day=24hours????
ONeil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-02, 02:03   #5
Uncwilly
6809 > 6502
 
Uncwilly's Avatar
 
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts

23×31×37 Posts
Default

Roughly, how many cores does your CPU have and at what rate does it run?

4 cores x 3 GHz x 1 day = 12 GHz-Days, approx.
Uncwilly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-02, 02:07   #6
kriesel
 
kriesel's Avatar
 
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest

2·32·269 Posts
Default

Glossary is here

There is not an equivalence for modern processors of GHzD/day rating = core count x clock frequency.
Only a very rough guide.
For example, a 6-core i7-8750H running ~2.2Ghz would be 13.2 GHzD/Day from that formula.
Per https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...51&postcount=3, depending on what's running, it produced differing throughputs of 19.31, 23.44, or 20.05 GHzD/day.
That's an FMA3 processor design. Other designs will achieve higher or lower throughputs per core-clock product.
Very old processors can be many times slower than core-clock product would predict.
Software efficiency and input parameters also vary the throughput.

Last fiddled with by kriesel on 2020-12-02 at 02:35
kriesel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-02, 02:12   #7
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
Jun 2011
Thailand

3·17·179 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ONeil View Post
I know this is another ignorant question.
What does 1 GHz-day equal in actual time? Is it 1Ghz-day=24hours????
If you have a machine with a single processor, your processor is 32 bits (like an old 386 or 486, or some "mendocino" haha), and it has a single core, and it runs at 1 GHz, then yes, you will spend about one day (24 hours) to get 1 GHzDay of work done.

As most current processors have 4 (or more) cores and they run at 3 (or more) GHz, you will spend about 24/(4*3)=2 hours (or less) to get the same 1 GHzDay of work done. In fact, you will spend less than that, because, unless you run a VERY old x86 rig, your processor it is at least an i3, which is a 64 bit processor, and does few operations faster than the "classics".

Anyhow, the best way is to run a benchmark from your P95 or Mprime program and see how many iterations and GHzDays your rig produces, to have an idea, before starting a 20-years job (somebody already mentioned similar thoughts). You then make the calculation, you should be good with numbers, judging from the graphs you post here and there...

Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2020-12-02 at 02:14
LaurV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-02, 02:13   #8
ONeil
 
Dec 2017

24×3×5 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncwilly View Post
Roughly, how many cores does your CPU have and at what rate does it run?

4 cores x 3 GHz x 1 day = 12 GHz-Days, approx.
I'm running two cores.

I just found another number though 8 digits and its smaller its says its a double check! Does that mean I will not get credit if its Mprime?
ONeil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-02, 03:06   #9
ONeil
 
Dec 2017

24×3×5 Posts
Default

Anyone out there Don't waste your time on double checks

Don't bother with Double Checks when a residue your just a slave...period

Quote:
The end result of the LL test is a "residue". The Mersenne number is prime if and only if this residue is exactly zero. If the residue is not zero, we keep only the last small part of it and record this in the database. This is a 64-bit hexadecimal number, consisting of the digits 0 through 9 and also the extra digits A through F, and it's exactly 16 digits long.
ONeil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-12-02, 03:31   #10
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

460410 Posts
Default

Well, at least your position is consistent with your coding- don't double check anything, just throw it out there without care for accuracy.

You wouldn't want to know if your computer works properly anyway... ignorance is bliss.
VBCurtis is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What does 'expected completion date' even mean? fivemack PrimeNet 7 2015-10-15 22:59
ETA VS Expected Completion Date QuickCoder Information & Answers 2 2014-09-05 00:19
Completion Date prediction Based on 24/7 Estimate? Unregistered Information & Answers 3 2009-11-21 23:57
Accuracy of completion date estimates? kdq Software 4 2008-10-04 05:02
Expected Completion Date Orgasmic Troll Software 4 2003-07-19 02:08

All times are UTC. The time now is 00:38.

Sat Jan 16 00:38:05 UTC 2021 up 43 days, 20:49, 1 user, load averages: 3.42, 3.10, 2.79

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.