Author |
Message |
RogerVolunteer developer Volunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 27 Nov 11 Posts: 1138 ID: 120786 Credit: 268,668,824 RAC: 0
                    
|
Welcome to the Mathematics Awareness Month Challenge
The third Challenge of the 2018 Challenge series is a 5 day challenge to celebrate Mathematics and Statistics Awareness Month. The challenge is being offered on the Extended Sierpinski Problem (LLR) application.
Each April 55,000 mathematicians and scientists celebrate Mathematics and Statistics Awareness Month to increase public understanding and appreciation for mathematics and statistics. Starting in 2017 the month's theme is to celebrate mathematics and statistics and the diverse researchers and students in these fields who are contributing so much to furthering discoveries, solving problems, and finding beauty in our world.
College, University and high school departments, institutional public information offices, math clubs, student groups, related associations and interest groups are urged to organize and host activities in April for Mathematics and Statistics Awareness Month. Past activities have included workshops, competitions, exhibits, festivals, lectures, symposia, department open houses, math art exhibits, and math poetry readings. Some years, elected officials have issued proclamations, frequently in connection with special meetings and events arranged to observe the month.
To participate in the Challenge, please select only the Extended Sierpinski Problem LLR (ESP) project in your PrimeGrid preferences section. The challenge will begin 3rd April 2018 12:00 UTC and end 8th April 2018 12:00 UTC.
Application builds are available for Linux 32 and 64 bit, Windows 32 and 64 bit and MacIntel. Intel CPUs with AVX capabilities (Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge, Haswell, Broadwell, Skylake, Kaby Lake, Coffee Lake) will have a very large advantage, and Intel CPUs with FMA3 (Haswell, Broadwell, Skylake, Kaby Lake, Coffee Lake) will be the fastest.
ATTENTION: The primality program LLR is CPU intensive; so, it is vital to have a stable system with good cooling. It does not tolerate "even the slightest of errors." Please see this post for more details on how you can "stress test" your computer. Tasks on one CPU core will take ~12 hours on fast/newer computers and 2+ days on slower/older computers. If your computer is highly overclocked, please consider "stress testing" it. Sieving is an excellent alternative for computers that are not able to LLR. :)
Highly overclocked Haswell, Broadwell, Skylake, Kaby Lake or Coffee Lake (i.e., Intel Core i7, i5, and i3 -4xxx or better) computers running the application will see fastest times. Note that ESP is running the latest FMA3 version of LLR which takes full advantage of the features of these newer CPUs. It's faster than the previous LLR app and draws more power and produces more heat. If you have a Haswell, Broadwell, Skylake, Kaby Lake or Coffee Lake CPU, especially if it's overclocked or has overclocked memory, and haven't run the new FMA3 LLR before, we strongly suggest running it before the challenge while you are monitoring the temperatures.
Please, please, please make sure your machines are up to the task.
Multi-threading optimisation instructions
Those looking to maximise their computer's performance during this challenge, or when running LLR in general, may find this information useful.
- Your mileage may vary. Before the challenge starts, take some time and experiment and see what works best on your computer.
- If you have an Intel CPU with hyperthreading, either turn off the hyperthreading in the BIOS, or set BOINC to use 50% of the processors.
- If you're using a GPU for other tasks, it may be beneficial to leave hyperthreading on in the BIOS and instead tell BOINC to use 50% of the CPU's. This will allow one of the hyperthreads to service the GPU.
- Use LLR's multithreaded mode. It requires a little bit of setup, but it's worth the effort. Follow these steps:
Time zone converter:
The World Clock - Time Zone Converter
NOTE: The countdown clock on the front page uses the host computer time. Therefore, if your computer time is off, so will the countdown clock. For precise timing, use the UTC Time in the data section at the very top, above the countdown clock.
Scoring Information
Scores will be kept for individuals and teams. Only tasks issued AFTER 3rd April 2018 12:00 UTC and received BEFORE 8th April 2018 12:00 UTC will be considered for credit. We will be using the same scoring method as we currently use for BOINC credits. A quorum of 2 is NOT needed to award Challenge score - i.e. no double checker. Therefore, each returned result will earn a Challenge score. Please note that if the result is eventually declared invalid, the score will be removed.
At the Conclusion of the Challenge
We kindly ask users "moving on" to ABORT their tasks instead of DETACHING, RESETTING, or PAUSING.
ABORTING tasks allows them to be recycled immediately; thus a much faster "clean up" to the end of an LLR Challenge. DETACHING, RESETTING, and PAUSING tasks causes them to remain in limbo until they EXPIRE. Therefore, we must wait until tasks expire to send them out to be completed.
Please consider either completing what's in the queue or ABORTING them. Thank you. :)
About the Extended Sierpinski Project
Wacław Franciszek Sierpiński (14 March 1882 - 21 October 1969), a Polish mathematician, was known for outstanding contributions to set theory, number theory, theory of functions and topology. It is in number theory where we find the Sierpinski problem.
Basically, the Sierpinski problem is "What is the smallest Sierpinski number" and the prime Sierpinski problem is "What is the smallest 'prime' Sierpinski number?"
First we look at Proth numbers (named after the French mathematician François Proth). A Proth number is a number of the form k*2^n+1 where k is odd, n is a positive integer, and 2^n>k.
A Sierpinski number is an odd k such that the Proth number k*2^n+1 is not prime for all n. For example, 3 is not a Sierpinski number because n=2 produces a prime number (3*2^2+1=13). In 1962, John Selfridge proved that 78,557 is a Sierpinski number...meaning he showed that for all n, 78557*2^n+1 was not prime.
Most number theorists believe that 78,557 is the smallest Sierpinski number, but it hasn't yet been proven. In order to prove it, it has to be shown that every single k less than 78,557 is not a Sierpinski number, and to do that, some n must be found that makes k*2^n+1 prime.
The smallest proven 'prime' Sierpinski number is 271,129. In order to prove it, it has to be shown that every single 'prime' k less than 271,129 is not a Sierpinski number, and to do that, some n must be found that makes k*2^n+1 prime.
Should both of these problems be solved, k = 78557 will be established as the smallest Sierpinski number, and k = 271129 will be established as the smallest prime Sierpinski number. However, this would not prove that k = 271129 is the second provable Sierpinski number. Since the prime Sierpinski problem is testing all prime k's for 78557 < k < 271129, all that's needed is to test the composite k's for 78557 < k < 271129. Thus, the Extended Sierpinski Problem is established.
The following k's remain for each project:
Sierpinski problem (SoB) Prime Sierpinski problem (PSP) Extended Sierpinski Problem (ESP)
21181 22699* 91549
22699 67607* 99739
24737 79309 131179
55459 79817 163187
67607 152267 193997
156511 200749
222113 202705
225931 209611
237019 227723
229673
238411
'*being tested by Seventeen or Bust
Additional Information
For more information about Sierpinski, Sierpinski number, and the Sierpinsk problem, please see these resources:
What is LLR?
The Lucas-Lehmer-Riesel (LLR) test is a primality test for numbers of the form N = k*2^n − 1, with 2^n > k. Also, LLR is a program developed by Jean Penne that can run the LLR-tests. It includes the Proth test to perform +1 tests and PRP to test non base 2 numbers. See also:
(Edouard Lucas: 1842-1891, Derrick H. Lehmer: 1905-1991, Hans Riesel: 1929-2014).
____________
|
|
|
Dad Send message
Joined: 28 Feb 18 Posts: 284 ID: 984171 Credit: 182,080,291 RAC: 0
                 
|
WooHoo, my first Challenge
Now the questions...
Do you have app_config instructions for linux?
Are they needed for Linux?
Trying to clear my 'old' tasks now to be ready for April 3
PS. nice that you have a 12:00:00 UTC start, is that for everybody living on that side of the planet??? (just joking)
____________
Tonight's lucky numbers are
555*2^3563328+1 (PPS-MEGA)
and
58523466^131072+1 (GFN-17 MEGA) |
|
|
dthonon Volunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 6 Dec 17 Posts: 435 ID: 957147 Credit: 1,737,342,032 RAC: 25,049
                                
|
app_config.xml applies also to Linux. Depending on your distribution, it should be in /var/lib/boinc or /var/lib/boinc-client .
After changing this file, you have to restart boinc :
systemctl restart boinc-client |
|
|
|
You wrote name of this mathematician a bit incorrectly - special Polish characters are changed to their closest Latin equivalents. His name should be written as "Wacław Franciszek Sierpiński" (I bolded two changed letters).
____________
|
|
|
Dave  Send message
Joined: 13 Feb 12 Posts: 3171 ID: 130544 Credit: 2,232,601,697 RAC: 671,858
                           
|
I'm in for this one. Also it ties in better with my sequential turquoise plan. |
|
|
RogerVolunteer developer Volunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 27 Nov 11 Posts: 1138 ID: 120786 Credit: 268,668,824 RAC: 0
                    
|
You wrote name of this mathematician a bit incorrectly - special Polish characters are changed to their closest Latin equivalents. His name should be written as "Wacław Franciszek Sierpiński" (I bolded two changed letters).
Excellent! I love this kind of feedback. Change made to my original Welcome post. |
|
|
RogerVolunteer developer Volunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 27 Nov 11 Posts: 1138 ID: 120786 Credit: 268,668,824 RAC: 0
                    
|
WooHoo, my first Challenge
Now the questions...
Do you have app_config instructions for linux?
Are they needed for Linux?
Trying to clear my 'old' tasks now to be ready for April 3
PS. nice that you have a 12:00:00 UTC start, is that for everybody living on that side of the planet??? (just joking)
Hey Dad,
Welcome to the Challenge. Start times are shared around as participants are located all over the globe. I am more open to alternate times than most, as I am GMT+8, Perth. I am sensitive to what works for most of the people. Trying to draw the biggest crowd is always a juggling act. Have a look at the Challenge Schedule for 2018. I think I've given the start times a fair spread.
Cheers,
Roger |
|
|
|
You wrote name of this mathematician a bit incorrectly - special Polish characters are changed to their closest Latin equivalents. His name should be written as "Wacław Franciszek Sierpiński" (I bolded two changed letters).
Excellent! I love this kind of feedback. Change made to my original Welcome post.
The pronunciation can be seen in the beginning of English language Wikipedia article Wacław Sierpiński. /JeppeSN |
|
|
Dad Send message
Joined: 28 Feb 18 Posts: 284 ID: 984171 Credit: 182,080,291 RAC: 0
                 
|
No problem Roger - I'm in (near) Canberra
Trust me to pick this challenge as my first!!!
By the By... I will have a few more questions later today after I've played some more with app_config
Cheers
Dad
____________
Tonight's lucky numbers are
555*2^3563328+1 (PPS-MEGA)
and
58523466^131072+1 (GFN-17 MEGA) |
|
|
Dad Send message
Joined: 28 Feb 18 Posts: 284 ID: 984171 Credit: 182,080,291 RAC: 0
                 
|
OK, so after a bit of playing, using PPSE as my guinea pig tasks I can see the following...
System is an i7 8700K with a GTX 1070Ti - no overclocking
System is set to only take PPSE tasks except for the GPU - it will take any task
1) Run all cores and multithread - runs 12 PPSE tasks each taking approx 24 minutes
2) Run all cores Boinc set to 50% CPU - runs 6 PPSE tasks each taking approx 11 minutes
3) Run with Boinc set to 50% and app_config - runs 1 task taking approx 3 minutes 40 secs
So, for the challenge, do I want to do as many tasks as possible - option 2 or do I want to complete a task in the quickest time possible - option 3?
I'm also making the assumption that what I see for PPSE tasks will be similar for the challenge tasks
Thoughts?
Thanx
Dad
____________
Tonight's lucky numbers are
555*2^3563328+1 (PPS-MEGA)
and
58523466^131072+1 (GFN-17 MEGA) |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
OK, so after a bit of playing, using PPSE as my guinea pig tasks I can see the following...
System is an i7 8700K with a GTX 1070Ti - no overclocking
System is set to only take PPSE tasks except for the GPU - it will take any task
1) Run all cores and multithread - runs 12 PPSE tasks each taking approx 24 minutes
2) Run all cores Boinc set to 50% CPU - runs 6 PPSE tasks each taking approx 11 minutes
3) Run with Boinc set to 50% and app_config - runs 1 task taking approx 3 minutes 40 secs
So, for the challenge, do I want to do as many tasks as possible - option 2 or do I want to complete a task in the quickest time possible - option 3?
I'm also making the assumption that what I see for PPSE tasks will be similar for the challenge tasks
Thoughts?
Thanx
Dad
ESP tasks are a lot longer, and multi-threading performance will be different with ESP than with the very short PPSE tasks. It is likely that option #3 will give you BOTH the shortest run time AND the most number of tasks done, so #3 is what will likely work best for you.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
Dad Send message
Joined: 28 Feb 18 Posts: 284 ID: 984171 Credit: 182,080,291 RAC: 0
                 
|
Ahhhh, Thanx Michael. I didn't think about runtimes.
I'll switch back to option 2 for the current PPSEs and get ready for next week
WooHoo
Thanx for all the help
____________
Tonight's lucky numbers are
555*2^3563328+1 (PPS-MEGA)
and
58523466^131072+1 (GFN-17 MEGA) |
|
|
|
on my i7-6700, found best PPSe performance with running 3 tasks by 2 CPUs each at the same time. Plus I can still run GPU tasks. |
|
|
|
1) Run all cores and multithread - runs 12 PPSE tasks each taking approx 24 minutes
2) Run all cores Boinc set to 50% CPU - runs 6 PPSE tasks each taking approx 11 minutes
3) Run with Boinc set to 50% and app_config - runs 1 task taking approx 3 minutes 40 secs
So, for the challenge, do I want to do as many tasks as possible - option 2 or do I want to complete a task in the quickest time possible - option 3?
Dad,
Also look at it like this, knowing these are just PPSE tasks and as Michael said ESP is a lot longer and the results may not be the same. There should still be time for testing.
If you use option 3, how long will it take to finish the six tasks that option 2 can finish in about 11 minutes? IFF I calculated it correctly you're looking at over 20 minutes using option 3 for those six tasks, but I wouldn't trust my math any more, so double check it. It'll definitely be longer tho. Again, this is using the times you posted for PPSE tasks.
I've tested this on this computer (i7-2600) also and come up with the same results, even before I knew about multithreading. I can run certain projects faster with HT (6 at a time) than I can with HT turned off (3) at a time. Not individual tasks, but more tasks per time period (12 hours, 24 hours, 3 days...), challenge lengths.
Hope this helps. The two most important things are test, test, test. And you can't take data from one project and use on another with anything like reliable results.
Good luck,
John T |
|
|
|
I am interested in participating and tried to put the xml in the directory you gave but couldn't find it. Is it possible to just create a projects folder and stick it in there? |
|
|
dukebgVolunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 21 Nov 17 Posts: 242 ID: 950482 Credit: 23,670,125 RAC: 0
                  
|
I am interested in participating and tried to put the xml in the directory you gave but couldn't find it. Is it possible to just create a projects folder and stick it in there?
If you're running PrimeGrid through BOINC, there is a folder. |
|
|
Dave  Send message
Joined: 13 Feb 12 Posts: 3171 ID: 130544 Credit: 2,232,601,697 RAC: 671,858
                           
|
Have you enabled visibility of hidden & system files if need be? |
|
|
|
I did not have it enabled; enabling it fixed my issue.
That actually explains a couple other issues I've had with missing folders...
Thanks! |
|
|
RogerVolunteer developer Volunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 27 Nov 11 Posts: 1138 ID: 120786 Credit: 268,668,824 RAC: 0
                    
|
ESP's been slowly rising, from 634 tasks completed per day till 994 currently.
Expecting a big leap as the Challenge begins:
8 minutes till Challenge start. Let's hope for a prime! |
|
|
Dad Send message
Joined: 28 Feb 18 Posts: 284 ID: 984171 Credit: 182,080,291 RAC: 0
                 
|
WooHoo
Think I'm running - now time for bed
Dad
____________
Tonight's lucky numbers are
555*2^3563328+1 (PPS-MEGA)
and
58523466^131072+1 (GFN-17 MEGA) |
|
|
Monkeydee Volunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 8 Dec 13 Posts: 532 ID: 284516 Credit: 1,430,632,848 RAC: 1,625,564
                           
|
8 minutes till Challenge start. Let's hope for a prime!
In any project. Haha
We found a Woodall prime in the 321 challenge. Will we see an SR5 prime in the ESP challenge? Maybe a PSP prime?
____________
My Primes
Badge Score: 4*2 + 6*2 + 7*4 + 8*8 + 11*3 + 12*1 = 157
|
|
|
robish Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 7 Jan 12 Posts: 2195 ID: 126266 Credit: 7,308,047,677 RAC: 3,268,787
                               
|
.....and we're off :)
____________
My lucky numbers 10590941048576+1 and 224584605939537911+81292139*23#*n for n=0..26 |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
8 minutes till Challenge start. Let's hope for a prime!
In any project. Haha
We found a Woodall prime in the 321 challenge. Will we see an SR5 prime in the ESP challenge? Maybe a PSP prime?
Ummmmmmmmmmmmm...
Looks like we've eliminated one K from the Extended Sierpinski Problem during the first couple of hours of the challenge.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
That‘s fantastic!
____________
My lucky number: 65531*2^3629342-1 (TRP) |
|
|
Monkeydee Volunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 8 Dec 13 Posts: 532 ID: 284516 Credit: 1,430,632,848 RAC: 1,625,564
                           
|
8 minutes till Challenge start. Let's hope for a prime!
In any project. Haha
We found a Woodall prime in the 321 challenge. Will we see an SR5 prime in the ESP challenge? Maybe a PSP prime?
Ummmmmmmmmmmmm...
Looks like we've eliminated one K from the Extended Sierpinski Problem during the first couple of hours of the challenge.
... ... Incredible!
____________
My Primes
Badge Score: 4*2 + 6*2 + 7*4 + 8*8 + 11*3 + 12*1 = 157
|
|
|
dukebgVolunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 21 Nov 17 Posts: 242 ID: 950482 Credit: 23,670,125 RAC: 0
                  
|
It's so bonkers that it happened right at the start too. Someone keeping to ESP while everyone was busy with 321 could have maybe gotten it. |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
It's so bonkers that it happened right at the start too. Someone keeping to ESP while everyone was busy with 321 could have maybe gotten it.
It was returned within 4 hours of the start. It was sent out in the first 10 minutes of the challenge, and the prime finder and the wingman got the task within seconds of each other.
That being said, if it weren't for the challenge, that task wouldn't have been sent out for another week or two. Even with large tasks like these, thousands of tasks get sent out in the first few minutes of a challenge.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
8 minutes till Challenge start. Let's hope for a prime!
In any project. Haha
We found a Woodall prime in the 321 challenge. Will we see an SR5 prime in the ESP challenge? Maybe a PSP prime?
Ummmmmmmmmmmmm...
Looks like we've eliminated one K from the Extended Sierpinski Problem during the first couple of hours of the challenge.
Really cool. And I think [we almost proved] reverse psychology works with the prime gods. /JeppeSN |
|
|
robish Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 7 Jan 12 Posts: 2195 ID: 126266 Credit: 7,308,047,677 RAC: 3,268,787
                               
|
It's so bonkers that it happened right at the start too. Someone keeping to ESP while everyone was busy with 321 could have maybe gotten it.
It was returned within 4 hours of the start. It was sent out in the first 10 minutes of the challenge, and the prime finder and the wingman got the task within seconds of each other.
That being said, if it weren't for the challenge, that task wouldn't have been sent out for another week or two. Even with large tasks like these, thousands of tasks get sent out in the first few minutes of a challenge.
Well it wasn't me. Mine are averaging 11 hours. Might be time for new kit. Almost 5 years old most of it. DC fingers crossed 😊
____________
My lucky numbers 10590941048576+1 and 224584605939537911+81292139*23#*n for n=0..26 |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
193997*2^11452891+1
Congratulations tng*!
GDB is the double checker.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
RafaelVolunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 22 Oct 14 Posts: 909 ID: 370496 Credit: 528,944,930 RAC: 345,452
                        
|
193997*2^11452891+1
Congratulations tng*!
GDB is the double checker.
How are the chances of reopening ESP SV looking like with one less k in the pipeline? |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
193997*2^11452891+1
Congratulations tng*!
GDB is the double checker.
How are the chances of reopening ESP SV looking like with one less k in the pipeline?
Nothing changes.
Don't forget we would be finding fewer factors with one less K. The sieve, if it speeds up at all, won't speed up enough to make up for finding fewer factors. So we're even more optimally sieved than before, and less likely to want to reopen the sieve.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
Honza Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Project scientist Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 05 Posts: 1948 ID: 352 Credit: 6,008,227,720 RAC: 1,517,453
                                      
|
Very good job.
Eliminating K=193997 at the beginning of the challenge will push ESP even a bit more because we will process a bit more candidates for remaining K's.
Last K was eliminated in early 2015, it was first mega-ESP back then.
____________
My stats |
|
|
|
I start now too by this Challenge. +1
Greetz SEARCHER
____________
Member of Charity Team
|
|
|
robish Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 7 Jan 12 Posts: 2195 ID: 126266 Credit: 7,308,047,677 RAC: 3,268,787
                               
|
193997*2^11452891+1
Congratulations tng*!
GDB is the double checker.
Congrats tng* and GDB, brilliant stuff! Very well done ;)
____________
My lucky numbers 10590941048576+1 and 224584605939537911+81292139*23#*n for n=0..26 |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
After 1 day:
Challenge: Mathematics Awareness Month
App: 20 (ESP-LLR)
(As of 2018-04-04 12:57:43 UTC)
10568 tasks have been sent out. [CPU/GPU/anonymous_platform: 10508 (99%) / 0 (0%) / 60 (1%)]
Of those tasks that have been sent out:
749 (7%) came back with some kind of an error. [749 (7%) / 0 (0%) / 0 (0%)]
2838 (27%) have returned a successful result. [2792 (26%) / 0 (0%) / 46 (0%)]
6981 (66%) are still in progress. [6967 (66%) / 0 (0%) / 14 (0%)]
Of the tasks that have been returned successfully:
1928 (68%) are pending validation. [1897 (67%) / 0 (0%) / 31 (1%)]
901 (32%) have been successfully validated. [886 (31%) / 0 (0%) / 15 (1%)]
3 (0%) were invalid. [3 (0%) / 0 (0%) / 0 (0%)]
6 (0%) are inconclusive. [6 (0%) / 0 (0%) / 0 (0%)]
The current leading edge (i.e., latest work unit for which work has actually been sent out to a host) is n=11572832. The leading edge was at n=11413664 at the beginning of the challenge. Since the challenge started, the leading edge has advanced 1.39% as much as it had prior to the challenge!
Normally this is the part where I say some variation of "participation is great and maybe we'll find a prime". Participation IS great, of course, but we've already found an ESP prime and eliminated a K. So...
Participation is great! Can we find a SECOND prime???
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
Jay Send message
Joined: 27 Feb 10 Posts: 131 ID: 56067 Credit: 63,534,968 RAC: 10,618
                    
|
The current leading edge (i.e., latest work unit for which work has actually been sent out to a host) is n=11572832. The leading edge was at n=11413664 at the beginning of the challenge. Since the challenge started, the leading edge has advanced 1.39% as much as it had prior to the challenge!?
I've always had a question about this in your updates and I'm finally going to ask.
When you say the leading edge has advanced X% as much as it had prior to the challenge, are you saying that since PrimeGrid started working on the project, PrimeGrid has completed 100% of the work completed with X% of that happening since the challenge started? And 100% minus X% completed prior to the challenge?
I think that's what you're saying, but I also feel like I'm misunderstanding something?
Can you confirm or correct?
Thanks,
Jay
|
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
It's a very simplistic calculation.
If the leading edge was at 2 million at the start of the challenge, and it's now at 3 million, then the increase is 50%.
It is not "work" that's being measured, only the increase in the value of the leading edge.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
Have you stopped sending out new work with multiplier 193997 already? At what time did that happen?
I think the tasks related to 193997 that have already been sent out, will still finish normally? And if no second work unit has been sent yet, or if results are inconclusive, you will still keep sending out work with the relevant n and with k=193997 until the status of each task is certain?
/JeppeSN
|
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
Have you stopped sending out new work with multiplier 193997 already? At what time did that happen?
I think the tasks related to 193997 that have already been sent out, will still finish normally? And if no second work unit has been sent yet, or if results are inconclusive, you will still keep sending out work with the relevant n and with k=193997 until the status of each task is certain?
/JeppeSN
* Generation of new WUs was suspended as soon as we saw the unverified prime.
* Existing WUs which have an active task, i.e., at least one task which was sent to a user, will complete normally, including sending out replacement tasks if necessary.
* Jim went the extra mile and killed already generated WUs which had not yet sent any tasks to users. That removed about 200 tasks from the ready-to-send queue.
As of right now:
2088 candidates were inhibited
190 are currently in progress. Of these 190, 86 have a lower N than the prime, and 104 have a higher N.
Also, there are zero tasks with k=193997 waiting to be sent to users at this time.
Nomenclature:
"Candidate" is a number to be tested.
A "Workunit" is created on the server to process the candidate.
Each workunit sends out 2 or more "Tasks" until at least 2 tasks return matching results.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
Thanks for the detailed reply. It was like I expected.
I shall try to use the terms "task" and "workunit" in the same sense as above, in the future, for the sake of easier communication.
/JeppeSN |
|
|
|
It looks like this was a fairly low weight k. (2nd lowest left maybe?)
I can't remember whether if we had our choice we'd eliminate a low or high weight k. Can someone remind me which we prefer and why?
Thanks! |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
It looks like this was a fairly low weight k. (2nd lowest left maybe?)
I can't remember whether if we had our choice we'd eliminate a low or high weight k. Can someone remind me which we prefer and why?
Thanks!
In the long run, it doesn't matter at all because we need to find a prime for each remaining K. No matter the order of discovery, the same amount of work needs to be performed.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
Since PrimeGrid began, we have found 11 primes larger than 3 million digits.
Three of them have been found in the last 15 days.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
dukebgVolunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 21 Nov 17 Posts: 242 ID: 950482 Credit: 23,670,125 RAC: 0
                  
|
It looks like this was a fairly low weight k. (2nd lowest left maybe?)
I can't remember whether if we had our choice we'd eliminate a low or high weight k. Can someone remind me which we prefer and why?
Thanks!
Knocking out 202705 would be very good, it has many more candidates that other K's.
The thing with the numbers that we are looking at is, the smallest primes eliminate giant sections of the candidates. For example, let's consider, say k=55459 (from SOB). numbers 55459*2^n+1 are obviously all odd, never divisible by 2. But how about division by 3? For the sequence 2^0, 2^1, ..., 2^n, ... the remainders from division by 3 would be either 1 or 2. Obviously, they're gonna be periodical. 55459 mod 3 = 1, so k*2^n mod 3 is switching 1 and 2, so k*2^n+1 is switching 2 and 0. In other words, every second number is divisible by 3. That is – we only need to study n = 2m, because for n=2m+1 the number is divisible by 3.
Next: let's check divisibility by 5? 2^(2m) mod 5 = 1, 4, 1, 4, ... Since 55459 = 4 mod 5, those 1s are making the whole number k*2^(2m)+1 = 0 mod 5. So divisor 5 eliminates half the candidates again, leaving us with n = 4m+2 now.
If you check divisibility by the next primes, it might be that neither remainder causes the whole number's remainder to become 0 (i.e. the remaining candidates are never divisible by this small prime), or it might again remove every 2nd or every 3rd or every nth candidate. If two primes remove for example all 3m+0 and 3m+1, that we can rewrite the n as 3m+2. Together with previous n=4m+2 we get 4(3m+2)+2 = 12m+10. It all depends on what remainders K has. It might happen that we get all the options removed. That's how you get a Serpiensky number, and the primes that knocked out all the candidates is the covering set.
However, the "periods" of 2^n mod p sequences become larger and larger (I'm not going to get into that right now), so if you weren't "lucky" in the beginning, you're not getting rid of large enough sections (like every 2nd, every 3rd) any more. A prime 5912697221 would only remove every 5912697220th n. So the things are very different for different k's in the beginning, but mostly the same for larger factors removed when sieving.
here's the list for all SOB/PSP/ESP k's (in format "for k=... the remaining candidates should have form ...)
SOB 21181 - 24m+20
SOB 22699 - 72m+46
SOB 24737 - 24m+7
SOB 55459 - 12m+10
SOB 67607 - 8m+3
PSP 79309 - 72m+38
PSP 79817 - 8m+7
ESP 91549 - 24m+6
ESP 99739 - 12m+6
ESP 131179 - 36m+2
PSP 152267 - 24m+3
PSP 156511 - 72m+48
ESP 163187 - 24m+15
ESP 193997 - 36m+31
ESP 200749 - 24m+18
ESP 202705 - 2m+0
ESP 209611 - 24m+8
PSP 222113 - 8m+5
PSP 225931 - 24m+8
ESP 227723 - 24m+13
ESP 229673 - 36m+33
PSP 237019 - 36m+34
ESP 238411 - 12m+0
If you look at the numbers in your tasks, you'll see that n's are, obviously, of these forms. It's not a big deal actually, when sieving, "the rest" are removed in the first milliseconds. But it's still a fun thing to grasp. As you can see, for 202705, only half are removed by that form, while for something like SOB 22699 only 1/72th is remaining. Thus 202705 has many more candidates to test.
I hope this post is comprehensible enough. I've been meaning to gather all my thoughts on this into an educational math video of some sort, maybe one day I'll get to it. In this post omitted A LOT of what I want to talk about too. It's fun stuff. |
|
|
|
Awesome response! THANKS! I had no idea why some were high and some were low weight, just knew that they were.
But I'm still not sure I'm sold on which we'd rather eliminate. . .
Argument for eliminating High Weight:
It eliminates a ton of candidates, and allows us to get to a higher n faster.
Argument for eliminating a Low Weight:
Each check at a given prime value has roughly the same chance of being prime, and takes a similar time to check. We like the high weight because it gives us more chances to find a prime without the computation getting substantially more difficult. If it's going to take 10,000 tests to find a prime on each of them, the 10,000th test is going to be a lot harder on a low weight.
In the end, it's probably a wash, and we have to find all of them anyway so it's just good to have another k down.
(Thanks again. Not trying to downplay your post. I'll watch that video if you post it. :-) )
CW |
|
|
robish Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 7 Jan 12 Posts: 2195 ID: 126266 Credit: 7,308,047,677 RAC: 3,268,787
                               
|
I hope this post is comprehensible enough. I've been meaning to gather all my thoughts on this into an educational math video of some sort, maybe one day I'll get to it. In this post omitted A LOT of what I want to talk about too. It's fun stuff.
Thanks dukebg, for making it easy-er to follow. Read it ten times ish before it sank in. 😊 look forward to the vid. Cheers
But that's my fault not yours 😁
____________
My lucky numbers 10590941048576+1 and 224584605939537911+81292139*23#*n for n=0..26 |
|
|
dukebgVolunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 21 Nov 17 Posts: 242 ID: 950482 Credit: 23,670,125 RAC: 0
                  
|
But I'm still not sure I'm sold on which we'd rather eliminate. . .
Argument for eliminating High Weight:
It eliminates a ton of candidates, and allows us to get to a higher n faster.
Argument for eliminating a Low Weight:
Each check at a given prime value has roughly the same chance of being prime, and takes a similar time to check. We like the high weight because it gives us more chances to find a prime without the computation getting substantially more difficult. If it's going to take 10,000 tests to find a prime on each of them, the 10,000th test is going to be a lot harder on a low weight.
That's a very good point. I wasn't thinking about this, but I'm gonna agree with you. It would indeed be easier if we'll have to check the smaller numbers the longest.
But for proving the whole conjecture overall. My gut feeling, not backed by anything, is that some of those last primes are hiding in much, much larger n's. For reference, we're around n~11.5M in ESP right now, and I'm talking about some prime in 100M, or in 10G. It's gonna be a while! |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
After 2 days:
Challenge: Mathematics Awareness Month
App: 20 (ESP-LLR)
(As of 2018-04-05 14:37:21 UTC)
15801 tasks have been sent out. [CPU/GPU/anonymous_platform: 15690 (99%) / 0 (0%) / 111 (1%)]
Of those tasks that have been sent out:
1338 (8%) came back with some kind of an error. [1338 (8%) / 0 (0%) / 0 (0%)]
7102 (45%) have returned a successful result. [7003 (44%) / 0 (0%) / 99 (1%)]
7361 (47%) are still in progress. [7349 (47%) / 0 (0%) / 12 (0%)]
Of the tasks that have been returned successfully:
3444 (48%) are pending validation. [3400 (48%) / 0 (0%) / 44 (1%)]
3628 (51%) have been successfully validated. [3574 (50%) / 0 (0%) / 54 (1%)]
10 (0%) were invalid. [10 (0%) / 0 (0%) / 0 (0%)]
20 (0%) are inconclusive. [19 (0%) / 0 (0%) / 1 (0%)]
The current leading edge (i.e., latest work unit for which work has actually been sent out to a host) is n=11651526. The leading edge was at n=11413664 at the beginning of the challenge. Since the challenge started, the leading edge has advanced 2.08% as much as it had prior to the challenge!
Time for a second ESP prime yet? Sometimes they come in bunches...
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
After three days:
Challenge: Mathematics Awareness Month
App: 20 (ESP-LLR)
(As of 2018-04-06 11:52:57 UTC)
19843 tasks have been sent out. [CPU/GPU/anonymous_platform: 19689 (99%) / 0 (0%) / 154 (1%)]
Of those tasks that have been sent out:
1567 (8%) came back with some kind of an error. [1567 (8%) / 0 (0%) / 0 (0%)]
10914 (55%) have returned a successful result. [10772 (54%) / 0 (0%) / 142 (1%)]
7362 (37%) are still in progress. [7350 (37%) / 0 (0%) / 12 (0%)]
Of the tasks that have been returned successfully:
3981 (36%) are pending validation. [3920 (36%) / 0 (0%) / 61 (1%)]
6890 (63%) have been successfully validated. [6809 (62%) / 0 (0%) / 81 (1%)]
23 (0%) were invalid. [23 (0%) / 0 (0%) / 0 (0%)]
20 (0%) are inconclusive. [20 (0%) / 0 (0%) / 0 (0%)]
The current leading edge (i.e., latest work unit for which work has actually been sent out to a host) is n=11717413. The leading edge was at n=11413664 at the beginning of the challenge. Since the challenge started, the leading edge has advanced 2.66% as much as it had prior to the challenge!
Two days left; can we eliminate a second k?
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
Hello
Under 300 participants.
That's a small number.
The challenge wasn't even advertised in my team forum.
Maybe a large number of PrimeGriders have been reluctant to abort running-on long tasks.
____________
|
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
Hello
Under 300 participants.
That's a small number.
The challenge wasn't even advertised in my team forum.
Maybe a large number of PrimeGriders have been reluctant to abort running-on long tasks.
Indeed, while the overall participation (amount of tasks done) is excellent, the number of individuals participating is down a bit. It's not obvious why this would be. We've followed the exact same procedures for this challenge as we do for other challenges.
As a rule, we don't go and "advertise" on forums other than our own. Many would consider that to be intrusive. What your own team members do is up to you, of course.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
Formula BOINC has a sprint going on for 3 days at the same time.
So there are quite a few doing that right now. And it is a CPU challenge.
Too bad one of these wasn't a GPU challenge so both can be run at the same time.
I am going back and forth, I found running 2 CPU projects at the same time causes too many issues.
And a big congratulations on finding that huge prime TNG |
|
|
|
There is a sprint going on, not a spring. I do not see the edit button
A sprint challenge for 3 days.
Well I found the edit button. lol Oh its one of those days!!!! |
|
|
|
I have one Linux box doing the Formula Boinc Sprint while everything else is participating in the PrimeGrid Race. Ok, in theory there are two other machines I could have running something if I stuck them together again.
The machine running VGTU atm is a spare that I didn't want to use at all this time, but VGTU is one of my favourite projects as well, so not participating at all wasn't sitting well with me. ;-)
____________
Greetings, Jens
147433824^131072+1 |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
With one day to go:
Challenge: Mathematics Awareness Month
App: 20 (ESP-LLR)
(As of 2018-04-07 13:19:30 UTC)
24098 tasks have been sent out. [CPU/GPU/anonymous_platform: 23894 (99%) / 0 (0%) / 204 (1%)]
Of those tasks that have been sent out:
2237 (9%) came back with some kind of an error. [2237 (9%) / 0 (0%) / 0 (0%)]
15388 (64%) have returned a successful result. [15194 (63%) / 0 (0%) / 194 (1%)]
6473 (27%) are still in progress. [6463 (27%) / 0 (0%) / 10 (0%)]
Of the tasks that have been returned successfully:
4211 (27%) are pending validation. [4157 (27%) / 0 (0%) / 54 (0%)]
11116 (72%) have been successfully validated. [10976 (71%) / 0 (0%) / 140 (1%)]
41 (0%) were invalid. [41 (0%) / 0 (0%) / 0 (0%)]
20 (0%) are inconclusive. [20 (0%) / 0 (0%) / 0 (0%)]
The current leading edge (i.e., latest work unit for which work has actually been sent out to a host) is n=11778590. The leading edge was at n=11413664 at the beginning of the challenge. Since the challenge started, the leading edge has advanced 3.20% as much as it had prior to the challenge!
Four days are done and one remains. Over fifteen thousand tasks have been returned. To put that in perspective, normal is about 200 each day. So far we've done almost exactly 20 times normal. And, of course, we eliminated one of the remaining k's.
Is there another prime hiding in the last day's tasks?
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
The end is near! The end of the challenge, that is. So it's time to remind everyone...
At the Conclusion of the Challenge
We would prefer users "moving on" to finish those tasks they have downloaded, if not then please ABORT the WU's (and then UPDATE the PrimeGrid project) instead of DETACHING, RESETTING, or PAUSING.
ABORTING WU's allows them to be recycled immediately; thus a much faster "clean up" to the end of a Challenge. DETACHING, RESETTING, and PAUSING WU's causes them to remain in limbo until they EXPIRE. Therefore, we must wait until WU's expire to send them out to be completed. Thank you!
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
We're done!
Challenge: Mathematics Awareness Month
App: 20 (ESP-LLR)
(As of 2018-04-08 12:01:43 UTC)
27624 tasks have been sent out. [CPU/GPU/anonymous_platform: 27377 (99%) / 0 (0%) / 247 (1%)]
Of those tasks that have been sent out:
3971 (14%) came back with some kind of an error. [3971 (14%) / 0 (0%) / 0 (0%)]
19615 (71%) have returned a successful result. [19373 (70%) / 0 (0%) / 242 (1%)]
4033 (15%) are still in progress. [4028 (15%) / 0 (0%) / 5 (0%)]
Of the tasks that have been returned successfully:
3759 (19%) are pending validation. [3704 (19%) / 0 (0%) / 55 (0%)]
15760 (80%) have been successfully validated. [15573 (79%) / 0 (0%) / 187 (1%)]
58 (0%) were invalid. [58 (0%) / 0 (0%) / 0 (0%)]
38 (0%) are inconclusive. [38 (0%) / 0 (0%) / 0 (0%)]
The current leading edge (i.e., latest work unit for which work has actually been sent out to a host) is n=11820458. The leading edge was at n=11413664 at the beginning of the challenge. Since the challenge started, the leading edge has advanced 3.56% as much as it had prior to the challenge!
ESP processing was about 20x normal, and we found the first ESP prime in over three years! How long will it take to find primes for the remaining 10 k's?
There's no BOINC challenge in May. The next scheduled BOINC challenge will be an SR5 challenge in mid-June. It is likely, however, that we'll be starting a double check of some old TRP that was only single checked under "Adaptive Replication."
Thanks everyone for participating!
(Information about the cleanup will be coming soon.)
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
I expect the cleanup to take 3 to 4 weeks.
Cleanup:
Apr: 8: Mathematics Awareness Month: 3789 tasks outstanding; 3608 affecting individual (271) scoring positions; 2612 affecting team (58) scoring positions.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
|
Thanks again!
Had a nice race.
See you next time!
____________
Greetings, Jens
147433824^131072+1 |
|
|
Dad Send message
Joined: 28 Feb 18 Posts: 284 ID: 984171 Credit: 182,080,291 RAC: 0
                 
|
WooHoo,
Had a great time, however...
I can no longer run more than 2 CPU tasks at once???
I HAD modified my APP_CONFIG file and changed the BOINC preference to 8.33%, now that the challenge is over I have set BOINC back to 100% and tried deleting the APP_CONFIG and/or changing APP_CONFIG to
<app_config>
<app>
<name>llrESP</name>
<fraction_done_exact/>
<max_concurrent>6</max_concurrent>
</app>
<app_version>
<app_name>llrESP</app_name>
<cmdline>-t 6</cmdline>
<avg_ncpus>6</avg_ncpus>
</app_version>
</app_config>
but all I get is 2 tasks running of the 5 it has downloaded
It's like the APP_CONFIG has persisted
Any thoughts???
Thanx
Dad
____________
Tonight's lucky numbers are
555*2^3563328+1 (PPS-MEGA)
and
58523466^131072+1 (GFN-17 MEGA) |
|
|
Reggie Volunteer moderator Project administrator Volunteer tester Project scientist Send message
Joined: 10 May 14 Posts: 230 ID: 311759 Credit: 207,219,210 RAC: 48,559
                    
|
WooHoo,
Had a great time, however...
I can no longer run more than 2 CPU tasks at once???
I HAD modified my APP_CONFIG file and changed the BOINC preference to 8.33%, now that the challenge is over I have set BOINC back to 100% and tried deleting the APP_CONFIG and/or changing APP_CONFIG to
<app_config>
<app>
<name>llrESP</name>
<fraction_done_exact/>
<max_concurrent>6</max_concurrent>
</app>
<app_version>
<app_name>llrESP</app_name>
<cmdline>-t 6</cmdline>
<avg_ncpus>6</avg_ncpus>
</app_version>
</app_config>
but all I get is 2 tasks running of the 5 it has downloaded
It's like the APP_CONFIG has persisted
Any thoughts???
Thanx
Dad
Try restarting your BOINC client if you haven't already.
|
|
|
Dad Send message
Joined: 28 Feb 18 Posts: 284 ID: 984171 Credit: 182,080,291 RAC: 0
                 
|
Restarted BOINC, rebooted the PC, turned it off and turned it on again
No change
____________
Tonight's lucky numbers are
555*2^3563328+1 (PPS-MEGA)
and
58523466^131072+1 (GFN-17 MEGA) |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
<max_concurrent>6</max_concurrent>
<cmdline>-t 6</cmdline>
<avg_ncpus>6</avg_ncpus>
Unless you have a CPU with 36 or more cores, those commands don't go together.
It's clear you don't understand what at least one of those directives does, so let's start at the beginning:
How many cores do you have, and what are you trying to do?
For reference, what those directives do:
<max_concurrent tells BOINC the *maximum* number of simultaneous tasks that you want to run. In your example, it forces BOINC to always run less than 7. That doesn't mean it will run 6. It's free to run fewer. But it will never run more than 6.
<avg_ncpus> tells BOINC how many CPUs it should expect this task to use.
<cmdline> is telling LLR to use 6 cores.
So, you're telling BOINC to use 6 cores, and you're telling BOINC the task is going to use 6 cores. Assuming you have a 6 core machine, that means BOINC is able to run 1 task at a time. The <max_concurrent> tag doesn't change anything because 1 is less than 6.
If you have a 36 core CPU, then 6 tasks, each using 6 cores apiece, would run simultaneously.
If you have a 42 core CPU, you would still get 6 tasks running at once because the <max_concurrent> tag would limit BOINC to running 6 tasks simultaneously.
If what you want to do now is run 6 tasks simultaneously, each running on a single core, you should simply remove all three directives since this is BOINC's nominal behavior unless you tell it to do otherwise.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
Dad Send message
Joined: 28 Feb 18 Posts: 284 ID: 984171 Credit: 182,080,291 RAC: 0
                 
|
You're correct Michael, I have no Idea what these commands do.
I have an i7 8700k - 6 cores and multithreading turned ON
Before this challenge I could run 12 simultaneous WU's, now I can run 2 of the 5 downloaded
I thought deleting the app_config would fix it, obviously not
Dad
____________
Tonight's lucky numbers are
555*2^3563328+1 (PPS-MEGA)
and
58523466^131072+1 (GFN-17 MEGA) |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
You're correct Michael, I have no Idea what these commands do.
I have an i7 8700k - 6 cores and multithreading turned ON
Before this challenge I could run 12 simultaneous WU's, now I can run 2 of the 5 downloaded
I thought deleting the app_config would fix it, obviously not
Dad
You didn't answer what you wanted to do -- you want to run 12 tasks at once?
If so:
1) Make sure you're set to use 100% of the CPUs in the BOINC preferences
2) delete app_config.xml
3) reboot the computer
Please note that if you're using this computer to run LLR, this is a very inefficient configuration. You'll get more tasks completed over a given period of time if it runs a single 6-core LLR task at a time, assuming they're large tasks like ESP or 321.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
Dad Send message
Joined: 28 Feb 18 Posts: 284 ID: 984171 Credit: 182,080,291 RAC: 0
                 
|
My APP_CONFIG is now
<app_config>
<app>
<name>llrESP</name>
<fraction_done_exact/>
<max_concurrent></max_concurrent>
</app>
<app_version>
<app_name>llrESP</app_name>
<cmdline></cmdline>
<avg_ncpus></avg_ncpus>
</app_version>
</app_config>
The three entries have been 'removed', the PC has been restarted
No change - 2 tasks run, 3 wait and nothing else
Dad
____________
Tonight's lucky numbers are
555*2^3563328+1 (PPS-MEGA)
and
58523466^131072+1 (GFN-17 MEGA) |
|
|
Dad Send message
Joined: 28 Feb 18 Posts: 284 ID: 984171 Credit: 182,080,291 RAC: 0
                 
|
Michael,
I have already deleted APP_CONFIG and rebooted with no change
Yes I want to run 12 tasks at once - understand this is inefficient, but I don't 'select' which tasks to run
Dad
____________
Tonight's lucky numbers are
555*2^3563328+1 (PPS-MEGA)
and
58523466^131072+1 (GFN-17 MEGA) |
|
|
|
You're correct Michael, I have no Idea what these commands do.
I have an i7 8700k - 6 cores and multithreading turned ON
Before this challenge I could run 12 simultaneous WU's, now I can run 2 of the 5 downloaded
I thought deleting the app_config would fix it, obviously not
Dad
Deleting app_config.xml does not restore default thread config. This is a known bug in BOINC, I reported it some time ago. You have to first configure app to use 1 thread only and reload config/restart BOINC. After doing so you can safely delete app_config.xml.
____________
|
|
|
Dad Send message
Joined: 28 Feb 18 Posts: 284 ID: 984171 Credit: 182,080,291 RAC: 0
                 
|
Thanx Daniel,
I'll have a play now and see what transpires
Dad
____________
Tonight's lucky numbers are
555*2^3563328+1 (PPS-MEGA)
and
58523466^131072+1 (GFN-17 MEGA) |
|
|
Dad Send message
Joined: 28 Feb 18 Posts: 284 ID: 984171 Credit: 182,080,291 RAC: 0
                 
|
WooHoo
Daniel you are a genius - this is something I will have to try to remember for future challenges!!!
Dad
____________
Tonight's lucky numbers are
555*2^3563328+1 (PPS-MEGA)
and
58523466^131072+1 (GFN-17 MEGA) |
|
|
Michael Goetz Volunteer moderator Project administrator
 Send message
Joined: 21 Jan 10 Posts: 13954 ID: 53948 Credit: 392,040,015 RAC: 163,615
                               
|
I expect the cleanup to take 3 to 4 weeks.
Cleanup:
Apr 8: Mathematics Awareness Month: 3789 tasks outstanding; 3608 affecting individual (271) scoring positions; 2612 affecting team (58) scoring positions.
Apr 9: Mathematics Awareness Month: 2162 tasks outstanding; 1586 affecting individual (238) scoring positions; 893 affecting team (40) scoring positions.
Apr 10: Mathematics Awareness Month: 1427 tasks outstanding; 998 affecting individual (210) scoring positions; 379 affecting team (34) scoring positions.
Apr 11: Mathematics Awareness Month: 1150 tasks outstanding; 745 affecting individual (193) scoring positions; 302 affecting team (30) scoring positions.
Apr 12: Mathematics Awareness Month: 884 tasks outstanding; 537 affecting individual (166) scoring positions; 77 affecting team (23) scoring positions.
Apr 13: Mathematics Awareness Month: 562 tasks outstanding; 288 affecting individual (119) scoring positions; 20 affecting team (10) scoring positions.
Apr 14: Mathematics Awareness Month: 417 tasks outstanding; 190 affecting individual (91) scoring positions; 14 affecting team (7) scoring positions.
Apr 15: Mathematics Awareness Month: 300 tasks outstanding; 132 affecting individual (66) scoring positions; 11 affecting team (5) scoring positions.
Apr 16: Mathematics Awareness Month: 207 tasks outstanding; 89 affecting individual (51) scoring positions; 5 affecting team (4) scoring positions.
Apr 17: Mathematics Awareness Month: 126 tasks outstanding; 38 affecting individual (32) scoring positions; 4 affecting team (3) scoring positions.
Apr 18: Mathematics Awareness Month: 94 tasks outstanding; 22 affecting individual (21) scoring positions; 2 affecting team (2) scoring positions.
Apr 19: Mathematics Awareness Month: 62 tasks outstanding; 14 affecting individual (14) scoring positions; 1 affecting team (1) scoring positions.
Apr 20: Mathematics Awareness Month: 42 tasks outstanding; 8 affecting individual (8) scoring positions; 1 affecting team (1) scoring positions.
Apr 21: Mathematics Awareness Month: 33 tasks outstanding; 6 affecting individual (6) scoring positions; 1 affecting team (1) scoring positions.
Apr 22: Mathematics Awareness Month: 25 tasks outstanding; 2 affecting individual (2) scoring positions; 0 affecting team (0) scoring positions.
Apr 23: Mathematics Awareness Month: 23 tasks outstanding; 2 affecting individual (2) scoring positions; 0 affecting team (0) scoring positions.
Apr 24: Mathematics Awareness Month: 20 tasks outstanding; 2 affecting individual (2) scoring positions; 0 affecting team (0) scoring positions.
Apr 25: Mathematics Awareness Month: 17 tasks outstanding; 2 affecting individual (2) scoring positions; 0 affecting team (0) scoring positions.
____________
My lucky number is 75898524288+1 |
|
|
RogerVolunteer developer Volunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 27 Nov 11 Posts: 1138 ID: 120786 Credit: 268,668,824 RAC: 0
                    
|
The results are final!
Special congratulations to tng* for finding the prime 193997*2^11452891+1 and so elimiating one of the ESP k's!
Top 3 individuals:
1: zunewantan
2: xii5ku
3: Scott Brown
Top 3 teams:
1: Aggie The Pew
2: Czech National Team
3: SETI.Germany
Congratulations to the winners, and well done to everyone who participated.
See you at the World Cup Challenge!
____________
|
|
|
|
Top 3 individuals:
I think there is a little copy and paste error in this list. B-) |
|
|
RogerVolunteer developer Volunteer tester
 Send message
Joined: 27 Nov 11 Posts: 1138 ID: 120786 Credit: 268,668,824 RAC: 0
                    
|
Top 3 individuals:
I think there is a little copy and paste error in this list. B-)
Apologies, should be fixed now. |
|
|