| Author |
Message |
|---|
rogueVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 8 Sep 07
Posts: 1150
ID: 12001
Credit: 18,565,548
RAC: 0
 
|
|
It looks to me that PrimeGrid got poached: http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=121944.
Unless the searcher was really lucky or had many, many cores. |
|
|
 Crun-chi Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 09
Posts: 2388
ID: 50683
Credit: 41,661,745
RAC: 517
                 
|
|
It look like he found it alone... there is no Primegrid in" his prime"
____________
9 *10^1009567-1 REPDIGIT MEGA PRIME :) :) :)
57*2^3339932-1 MEGA PRIME :)
10994460^131072+1 GENERALIZED FERMAT :)
31*332^367560+1 CRUS PRIME :)
Proud member of team Aggie The Pew. Go Aggie! |
|
|
|
|
|
The second biggest factorial prime (http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=102627) was also found outside of Primegrid. |
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1676
ID: 352
Credit: 1,995,526,181
RAC: 961,162
                      
|
It looks to me that PrimeGrid got poached: http://primes.utm.edu/primes/page.php?id=121944.
Yeah, front-running...considering leading edge on PRPNet is ~204k and this one is 208003! - 1
Doing about 50 tests a day, we would have been there in under 3 months.
(during last year 2-weeks challenge, we have done almost 9000 test, it would have bring us there)
And lucky that this one is just megaprime (1015843 digits).
Perhaps Sou Fukui started the range from first megaprime factorial candidates and got lucky quite soon.
____________
My stats
Badge score: 1*1 + 5*2 + 8*13 + 9*2 + 12*3 = 169 |
|
|
JimBVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Send message
Joined: 4 Aug 11
Posts: 722
ID: 107307
Credit: 562,797,830
RAC: 3,981,590
               
|
|
By the way, that finder is our (former?) user Corticarte, as can easily be ascertained by looking at one of his older primes and matching it to the PrimeGrid Primes by Project listing. |
|
|
|
|
By the way, that finder is our (former?) user Corticarte, as can easily be ascertained by looking at one of his older primes and matching it to the PrimeGrid Primes by Project listing.
or easier with his prime list |
|
|
|
|
|
This is the second time in a row we got beaten (the two largest factorial primes are outside primegrid). We are plowing nice and predictable forward (bottom up) in the years. We see other people using different approaches and being more successful.
should we change tactics?
i.e. work top down for a block of numbers in stead of bottom up?
or use a combination (alternating) with one bottom up number coming from the server and than one top down (working our way to set of numbers in a pincer movement)?
off course we still can (and should not be willing) to prevent to search outsiders outside our tested range. but at least we make the stakes a little higher for outsiders and increase our changes of finding a world largest factorial prime
kind regards
Leon
|
|
|
HonzaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05
Posts: 1676
ID: 352
Credit: 1,995,526,181
RAC: 961,162
|
This is the second time in a row we got beaten (the two largest factorial primes are outside primegrid). We are plowing nice and predictable forward (bottom up) in the years. We see other people using different approaches and being more successful.
should we change tactics?
If it was easy, we could have moved Factorial to BOINC, make it another subproject and another badge.
Solely PG's BOINC user base hunting for badges would bring factorial so far (dozen thousands of tests) that it would almost inevitably yield a prime...largest known one.
(see Genefer for example)
Yeah, it is a shame being beaten twice in the same manner...with a low participationas rate, it is expected.
____________
My stats
Badge score: 1*1 + 5*2 + 8*13 + 9*2 + 12*3 = 169 |
|
|
|
|
|
For me the relative low amount of participants in this search is a given
I am just contemplating that we could change our tactics as a small group of searchers to increase our changes of finding an world leading prime and still work properly that do not leave any gaps in the search
i.e. search from 250K down to the current leading edge.
and than search downwards from 300K to 250K
kind regards
leon
|
|
|
|
|
For me the relative low amount of participants in this search is a given
I am just contemplating that we could change our tactics as a small group of searchers to increase our changes of finding an world leading prime and still work properly that do not leave any gaps in the search
i.e. search from 250K down to the current leading edge.
and than search downwards from 300K to 250K
Are you sure that would increase our chances to find a world record prime? How?
People searching without using PrimeGrid's (PRPNet) server could still do the same amount of work, and they could still predict where we would be searching.
/JeppeSN |
|
|
