mersenneforum.org Further Plans
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2006-02-25, 04:24 #1 Kosmaj     Nov 2003 E2616 Posts Further Plans As new projects we are thinking about doing the following. (1) Sieving and testing k*2^n-1, for small k<300. Actually a few days ago me and Larry already began sieving the following 20 k's in the n=210-600k range: 107, 115, 131, 133, 143, 145, 149, 167, 169, 175, 179, 181, 185, 187, 221, 227, 229, 233, 235, and 239. A few of these k's already have a prime at the 200k level but no ranges beyond n=210k have been reported as checked. A few others have been already checked to 230k and we'll romove those k/n pairs after sieving (ksieve2m requires a fixed interval of n, that's why we sieve them in the 210-230k range). If somebody already did some tests on these k's, or if somebody badly wants one of them to test by himself, please let us know. I'll post more details in the "k*2^n-1, k<300 thread". (2) Testng one promising k for megabit (n>1M) primes. We haven't selected k yet but I think that k=15 can be a good candidate. Are there any other suggestions? If you have an idea for something else please let us know. Thanks.
 2006-04-14, 04:27 #2 VBCurtis     "Curtis" Feb 2005 Riverside, CA 142616 Posts Since k=15 is already reserved, how about k=45? It produced more primes than k=15 anyway. If there is interest in running this k-value as a group, I'll start sieving it presently. By the time RPS 2nd drive gets to n=600,000 and the end of the sieve, I should have k=45 sieved deeply enough to start LLR work. Opinions? -Curtis
 2006-04-15, 20:46 #3 edorajh     Oct 2003 Croatia 7108 Posts I'm inetrested in k=45 and will participate in this search. Edo
 2006-04-17, 07:36 #4 Kosmaj     Nov 2003 2·1,811 Posts k=15 is reserved by Robert but I thought he wouldn't go beyond n=1M. I planned to asked him but I never did. You are right, we can try another k, and among k<100, k=45 has the largest weight. It has been checked to n=500k. If you decide to sieve it can you set n_min=500k and n_max=2M (or maybe 3M?). Some of us will join you later. BTW, Templus is sieving k=17 in the n=205k-2M for RPS too. By now he is somewhere at p=400bn. The idea is to double-check it to 600k (up to where primes were reported but no processed ranges), and go beyond in search for large ones. k=17 has the largest weight for k<100 and k%3!=0 but in comparison to 15k and 3k ones it's "lighter", and hopefully prolific
 2006-04-17, 17:13 #5 VBCurtis     "Curtis" Feb 2005 Riverside, CA 2·2,579 Posts Great! I'll start sieving k=45 presently. It runs on a slow machine, but it appears the first two drives will occupy RPS for a few months, so I should have it sieved deeply enough by the time we're ready to LLR a new project. Once I get to p=400B or so, I'll split the sieving onto multiple (slow) machines. I expect to be sieved deeply enough by 1 July or so to start LLR. I'm running a *big* sieve, so we'll have work on this k for as long as we want it. -Curtis
 2006-09-23, 06:44 #6 Kosmaj     Nov 2003 2·1,811 Posts Fifth Drive We are about to start team sieving of following Ks to be tested in the 5th Drive: 57, 135, 213, 237, 249, 261, 273, 279, 291 all from n=260k to 1M, except k=57 from 400k, k=135 from 300k, and k=213 from 250k. As you can see, all Ks all divisible by 3 and because of that we didn't work on them in the 2nd and 4th drive in order to speed up sieving. I'm not sure can we test all of them to 1M but we'll go as far as we can. Has anybody done any work (sieving or primality testing) on these Ks in indicated intervals of n? If so please let us know. The following Ks are under consideration but most likely will omit them: k=51, already tested to 475k. k=117 and k=129, there were some omissions in listed primes and achieved limits of n, therefore some double-checking may be required. Thank you. Last fiddled with by Kosmaj on 2006-09-23 at 06:45
 2006-09-29, 22:32 #7 Kosmaj     Nov 2003 2×1,811 Posts We are working on all 12 Ks mentioned above, that is 51, 57, 117, 129, 135, 213, 237, 249, 261, 273, 279, 291 and also on k=267 kindly released by grobie at n=300k. We'll test k=117 from 438k, and k=129 from 398k but its limit has been moved back to 253k. I'll write more about limits of these two Ks in the "k<300" thread.

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Raman Cunningham Tables 350 2016-10-10 10:19 rogue Conjectures 'R Us 35 2013-11-09 09:03 Oddball Lounge 4 2011-04-18 04:06 Kosmaj Riesel Prime Search 6 2009-05-20 01:27 pyrodave Software 17 2004-06-05 12:27

All times are UTC. The time now is 21:33.

Sat Jan 22 21:33:53 UTC 2022 up 183 days, 16:02, 0 users, load averages: 1.65, 1.37, 1.30