Benchmarks of small admissible tuples: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
| - | | - | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | |- | ||
| - | |5450 | ||
| - | | [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~xfxie/project/admissible/admissible_5450_51498_-56176.txt 51,498] (XFX) | ||
| | | [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~xfxie/project/admissible/admissible_5451_51516_-55712.txt 51,516] (XFX) | ||
| [http://math.mit.edu/~drew/admissible_5452_51520.txt '''51,520'''] (AVS) | |||
| [http://math.mit.edu/~drew/admissible_5453_51526.txt '''51,526'''] (AVS) | | [http://math.mit.edu/~drew/admissible_5453_51526.txt '''51,526'''] (AVS) | ||
| - | | [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~xfxie/project/admissible/admissible_5454_51534_-56228.txt 51,534] (XFX) | ||
| [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~xfxie/project/admissible/admissible_5455_51540_4678.txt '''51,540'''] (XFX&AVS) | |||
| - | | - | ||
| - | | - | ||
| Line 56: | Line 58: | ||
| - | | - | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | |5440 | ||
| - | | - | ||
| - | | - | ||
| Line 66: | Line 65: | ||
| - | | - | ||
| - | | - | ||
| [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~xfxie/project/admissible/admissible_5446_51456_2452.txt '''51,456'''] (XFX) | |||
| [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~xfxie/project/admissible/admissible_5447_51462_-53908.txt '''51,462'''] (XFX&AVS) | |||
| [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~xfxie/project/admissible/admissible_5448_51472_-53918.txt '''51472'''] (XFX&AVS) | |||
| - | | - | ||
|- | |- | ||
Revision as of 11:02, 20 June 2013
Here is a table to fill in the best upper bounds available for small admissible tuples (1~5500) and a few of others.
Rules
Efforts to fill in the blank fields in this table are very welcome. Here are the rules for the "Lucky Winner" game:
- "Winner" for each cell: You might enter each cell with a new tuple with the best upper bound and the abbreviation of your name (Your might append others' if your solution is obtained using others' work. It is encouraged to have a long chain to show the collaborative work.)
- "Lucky": Your cell will be "bold" if it is picked by an angel, if you are sufficiently lucky. The result will be qualified for showing in the main page. Your cell might be stroked through if the luck is not sustained (i.e., if the k0 claim is retracted).
Notes:
- Thomas J Engelsma have calculated upper bounds exactly for k0 up to 342, but he did not provide his tuples. So your contribution will be shown as TJE&<Your Name>, if your provide an optimal tuple.
Records
| [math]\displaystyle{ k_0 }[/math] | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6320 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 60,726 (XFX-AVS) | |
| 5500 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| 5450 | 51,498 (XFX) | 51,516 (XFX) | 51,520 (AVS) | 51,526 (AVS) | 51,534 (XFX) | 51,540 (XFX&AVS) | - | - | - | - | - |
| 5440 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 51,456 (XFX) | 51,462 (XFX&AVS) | 51472 (XFX&AVS) | - | |
| 4000 | 36,612 (XFX) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| 3000 | 26,606 (XFX) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| 2000 | 16,978 (TJE&XFX) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| 1000 | 7,802 (TJE&AVS) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| 340 | - | - | 342 (TJE&AVS) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Contributors
AVS: Andrew V. Sutherland
pedant
Scott Morrison
TJE: Thomas J. Engelsma
Wouter Castryck
XFX: xfxie
ZWS: Zhi-Wei Sun
Yitang Zhang: All work is based on Zhang's breakthrough paper.
