On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 4:06 AM, Brian J. Beesley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On 12 Sep 00, at 1:25, Robert Deininger wrote:
>
>> 4. The "duplicates only" tend to be the bigger, more recent exponents.
>
>... in the range (exponents over 6 million) where we don't yet expect to
>have had double-checking assignments?
Yes, the biggest duplicate is around 10.3 million. They're scattered
around
the map pretty evenly. But the biggest double-check on the primenet server
is in the 10.4 million range. (My lucas_v is 4 or 5 days old, so the
correlation is a bit off anyway.)
>> 5. The duplicates were reported by various programs - mostly the
>> WT, WU, WV, and WW series of programs. I guess that means that
>> manual check-ins are NOT responsible for the duplications.
>
>I wonder whether there was an incident on the PrimeNet server where a
>batch of results collected from the network was accidentally
>processed twice. If so the resulting duplication may be detectable at
>the server log file.
Something like that probably happened in some cases. The worst exponent
I noticed is duplicated 43 times.
---------------------------
Robert Deininger
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________________________________
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.exu.ilstu.edu/mersenne/faq-mers.txt
