MultiFactorial Prime Search

rogue · 2016-08-28, 00:32

The new Multifactorial search page can be found here. This is a site run by Marian Otremba. Please work with him if you want to participate in the search.

My page will still be available for a while but I won't be making updates. Once I complete the search on 7! to 600,000 I will likely take it down.

rogue · 2016-09-09, 01:13

I have verified that primes are missing from Ken's site for various types. Sigh! I have only tested for b < 8000 so far. Hopefully nothing larger is missing.

wombatman · 2016-09-09, 02:04

Are there any ranges you'd like help on?

rogue · 2016-09-09, 13:35

There seem to be a gap with n=16. If you want to sieve and test from 100001!16 thru 210000!16 (or further) that would be great.

wombatman · 2016-09-09, 20:22

No problem. I'll get start with n=16 from b=100001 to 210000.

Edit: Sorry, dumb question time. How do I start a new search? Do I need to set up a PFGW ABC file first?

rogue · 2016-09-10, 11:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by wombatman

No problem. I'll get start with n=16 from b=100001 to 210000.

Edit: Sorry, dumb question time. How do I start a new search? Do I need to set up a PFGW ABC file first?

You could use the -h option of mfsieve to tell you.

Use -M16 -n10e4 -N21e4 -P1e14 -m1e14 -omf16.out.

You will want to vary -t (# of threads) and -C (# of chunks) to find the optimal performance.

Before you start run a PRP test for a 180000!16+1 (or thereabouts). You will want to sieve until the removal rate is slower than the time for that PRP test. Note that if you have multiple threads, then you will have to adjust the removal rate accordingly.

wombatman · 2016-09-10, 12:16

I'm ashamed to admit that I did use -h and misunderstood what it was telling me...

Thanks for the instructions.

rogue · 2016-09-12, 18:45

I have more bad news. For the two types I ran up to 100,000 I found missing primes for one of those types for n > 50,000. That combined with what I already knew was missing means that about 25 percent of the ranges listed on his site are missing primes and that is only on the small range of numbers I have retested. It appears that it will take me a number of months to re-run everything. If anyone else wants to throw their hat into the ring, I would appreciate it. I will try to get my new webpage up later today.

Note that I'm not blaming Ken in any way. His webpage is based upon what others have reported to him. There is no way for him to know that results submitted to him are wrong.

rogue · 2016-09-22, 22:22

I have some good news. Now that OpenCL is working again fn my iMac, I can get back to an OpenCL version of the sieve. So far the testing is going smoothly, but I have further to go.

rogue · 2016-09-29, 18:35

I have more bad news. I have tested to over 40,000 on each of the types. Of the 24 I'm testing, 17 are missing primes with a total of 21 of 48 with missing primes when including both + and -.

Right now I'm focused on type 2 up to 100,000. Although there is nothing missing from that type, the problems I've seen with the other types force me to retest it. Hopefully that will complete by the end of October, but it is difficult to gauge how long it will take because of how quickly the numbers get larger.

henryzz · 2016-09-29, 19:14

It sounds like it may be more sensible just to start over.

2016-08-28, 00:32	#1
rogue "Mark" Apr 2003 Between here and the 1101000011101₂ Posts	MultiFactorial Prime Search The new Multifactorial search page can be found here. This is a site run by Marian Otremba. Please work with him if you want to participate in the search. My page will still be available for a while but I won't be making updates. Once I complete the search on 7! to 600,000 I will likely take it down. Last fiddled with by rogue on 2018-12-30 at 16:22

2016-09-09, 01:13	#2
rogue "Mark" Apr 2003 Between here and the 5·7·191 Posts	I have verified that primes are missing from Ken's site for various types. Sigh! I have only tested for b < 8000 so far. Hopefully nothing larger is missing. Last fiddled with by rogue on 2016-10-14 at 21:59

2016-09-09, 20:22	#5
wombatman I moo ablest echo power! May 2013 1,801 Posts	No problem. I'll get start with n=16 from b=100001 to 210000. Edit: Sorry, dumb question time. How do I start a new search? Do I need to set up a PFGW ABC file first? Last fiddled with by wombatman on 2016-09-09 at 20:26

2016-09-12, 18:45	#8
rogue "Mark" Apr 2003 Between here and the 6685₁₀ Posts	I have more bad news. For the two types I ran up to 100,000 I found missing primes for one of those types for n > 50,000. That combined with what I already knew was missing means that about 25 percent of the ranges listed on his site are missing primes and that is only on the small range of numbers I have retested. It appears that it will take me a number of months to re-run everything. If anyone else wants to throw their hat into the ring, I would appreciate it. I will try to get my new webpage up later today. Note that I'm not blaming Ken in any way. His webpage is based upon what others have reported to him. There is no way for him to know that results submitted to him are wrong. Last fiddled with by rogue on 2016-10-14 at 21:59

2016-09-29, 18:35	#10
rogue "Mark" Apr 2003 Between here and the 5×7×191 Posts	I have more bad news. I have tested to over 40,000 on each of the types. Of the 24 I'm testing, 17 are missing primes with a total of 21 of 48 with missing primes when including both + and -. Right now I'm focused on type 2 up to 100,000. Although there is nothing missing from that type, the problems I've seen with the other types force me to retest it. Hopefully that will complete by the end of October, but it is difficult to gauge how long it will take because of how quickly the numbers get larger. Last fiddled with by rogue on 2016-10-14 at 22:00

2016-09-09, 02:04	#3
wombatman I moo ablest echo power! May 2013 1801₁₀ Posts	Are there any ranges you'd like help on?

2016-09-09, 13:35	#4
rogue "Mark" Apr 2003 Between here and the 5·7·191 Posts	There seem to be a gap with n=16. If you want to sieve and test from 100001!16 thru 210000!16 (or further) that would be great.

2016-09-10, 12:16	#7
wombatman I moo ablest echo power! May 2013 1,801 Posts	I'm ashamed to admit that I did use -h and misunderstood what it was telling me... Thanks for the instructions.

2016-09-22, 22:22	#9
rogue "Mark" Apr 2003 Between here and the 5×7×191 Posts	I have some good news. Now that OpenCL is working again fn my iMac, I can get back to an OpenCL version of the sieve. So far the testing is going smoothly, but I have further to go.

2016-09-29, 19:14	#11
henryzz Just call me Henry "David" Sep 2007 Liverpool (GMT/BST) 2³·7·107 Posts	It sounds like it may be more sensible just to start over.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Twin prime search?	MooooMoo	Twin Prime Search	115	2010-08-29 17:38
Prime Search at School	Unregistered	Information & Answers	5	2009-10-15 22:44
k=51 or about coordinated prime search	Kosmaj	Riesel Prime Search	7	2007-07-13 22:15
Prime Search on PS-3?	Kosmaj	Riesel Prime Search	6	2006-11-21 15:19
Prime Search forum	geoff	Forum Feedback	3	2006-07-26 03:17