| Currently there may be errors shown on top of a page, because of a missing Wiki update (PHP version and extension DPL3). |
Navigation
| Topics | Help • Register • News • History • How to • Sequences statistics • Template prototypes |
Difference between revisions of "Multi Reservation talk:1-NMax"
(→PrimeGrid NMax and date appear to be incorrect: new section) |
(visual edit) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== PrimeGrid NMax and date appear to be incorrect == | == PrimeGrid NMax and date appear to be incorrect == | ||
| + | Can you provide a link that shows that the effort has fully reached {{Vn}}=5500000? We could not locate it. | ||
| + | #Per this [https://www.primegrid.com/primes/primes.php?project=PPS&sortby=date primes page], the largest prime is {{Vn}}=5185268 as of 2024-07-07. | ||
| + | #Per this [http://www.primegrid.com/stats_pps_llr.php drive page], the MinN in progress is {{Vn}}=5159656, the MaxN in progress is {{Vn}}=5193992 as of 2024-07-07. | ||
| + | We only update the NMax every few months and use the MinN in progress since that is the smallest test that is still outstanding. Here it is {{Vn}}=5159656. | ||
| − | + | In this case, we would probably update it when the effort reached {{Vn}}=5200000. Also when updating the NMax, the date needs to be updated. | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | Are the above links correct? If so and you prefer that it be updated now, then NMax should be {{Vn}}=5160000 (rounded off) and date should be 2024-07-07. --[[User:Gd barnes|Gd barnes]] ([[Talk:Gd barnes|talk]]) 07:14, 7 July 2024 (UTC) | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | :I rounded ''down'' (to {{Vn}}=5.15M) and applied the change myself based on prior precedent. Please sign your posts (I had to sign yours above) and don't use so many line breaks. --[[User:Happy5214|Happy5214]] ([[User talk:Happy5214|talk]]) 15:14, 7 July 2024 (UTC) | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ::PG uses the same status page of all {{Vk}}<1200, but changes the range of current searched values. A clear date of begin or end of such ranges seems not listed or hidden in their forum posts. It's also hard to give/find a date of for example a found Sierpinksi prime an days/weeks after that found the completed range to this {{Vn}}-value. It's a pity from begin of PG. Automated prime findings but nobody there to keep some history, their Wiki contains also almost no information about these ranges. [[User:Karbon|Karbon]] ([[User talk:Karbon|talk]]) 20:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC) | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | :::I figured this would generate some conversation. Alexander, I don't think that you should be dictating others writing style especially in informal discussions such as this. I find the run-together paragraphs to be nearly unreadable and the post was intended for Rytis. Here, paragraph breaks were needed for readability and I have re-inserted them. I simply forgot to sign my post. Further: I had intended to give Rytis a day to respond before making the correction. It seemed like the reasonable thing to do since he administers the effort. I guess we will carry on and see if he responds. -- [[User:Gd barnes|Gary Barnes]] ([[User talk:Gd barnes|talk]]) 23:47, 7 July 2024 (UTC) | |
| − | In this case, we would probably update it when the effort reached {{Vn}}=5200000. Also when updating the NMax, the date needs to be updated. | + | |
| − | + | ::::I'll try not to get too offended, since I was the one to complain about the line breaks. In the end, Karsten was actually the one who removed them. Whether he did it as a result of my reply or on his own is uncertain. I thought about removing the ''syntax'', but I would have kept the overall ''formatting''. MediaWiki automatically creates paragraphs when you separate runs of text with blank lines, so I would have removed the double <nowiki><br></nowiki> tags, which should have left the same visual result. In the end, I only added the partial signature and left the post itself alone. --[[User:Happy5214|Happy5214]] ([[User talk:Happy5214|talk]]) 20:42, 8 July 2024 (UTC) | |
| − | Are the above links correct? If so and you prefer that it be updated now, then NMax should be {{Vn}}=5160000 (rounded off) and date should be 2024-07-07.<br> | ||
Latest revision as of 09:05, 15 July 2024
PrimeGrid NMax and date appear to be incorrect
Can you provide a link that shows that the effort has fully reached n=5500000? We could not locate it.
- Per this primes page, the largest prime is n=5185268 as of 2024-07-07.
- Per this drive page, the MinN in progress is n=5159656, the MaxN in progress is n=5193992 as of 2024-07-07.
We only update the NMax every few months and use the MinN in progress since that is the smallest test that is still outstanding. Here it is n=5159656.
In this case, we would probably update it when the effort reached n=5200000. Also when updating the NMax, the date needs to be updated.
Are the above links correct? If so and you prefer that it be updated now, then NMax should be n=5160000 (rounded off) and date should be 2024-07-07. --Gd barnes (talk) 07:14, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- I rounded down (to n=5.15M) and applied the change myself based on prior precedent. Please sign your posts (I had to sign yours above) and don't use so many line breaks. --Happy5214 (talk) 15:14, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- PG uses the same status page of all k<1200, but changes the range of current searched values. A clear date of begin or end of such ranges seems not listed or hidden in their forum posts. It's also hard to give/find a date of for example a found Sierpinksi prime an days/weeks after that found the completed range to this n-value. It's a pity from begin of PG. Automated prime findings but nobody there to keep some history, their Wiki contains also almost no information about these ranges. Karbon (talk) 20:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- I figured this would generate some conversation. Alexander, I don't think that you should be dictating others writing style especially in informal discussions such as this. I find the run-together paragraphs to be nearly unreadable and the post was intended for Rytis. Here, paragraph breaks were needed for readability and I have re-inserted them. I simply forgot to sign my post. Further: I had intended to give Rytis a day to respond before making the correction. It seemed like the reasonable thing to do since he administers the effort. I guess we will carry on and see if he responds. -- Gary Barnes (talk) 23:47, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'll try not to get too offended, since I was the one to complain about the line breaks. In the end, Karsten was actually the one who removed them. Whether he did it as a result of my reply or on his own is uncertain. I thought about removing the syntax, but I would have kept the overall formatting. MediaWiki automatically creates paragraphs when you separate runs of text with blank lines, so I would have removed the double <br> tags, which should have left the same visual result. In the end, I only added the partial signature and left the post itself alone. --Happy5214 (talk) 20:42, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
