On Wednesday 30 October 2002 23:08, Gareth Randall wrote: > > Could you please expand upon how this secure certificate concept would > work, for the benefit of myself and the list? Unless there is more to it > than I currently comprehend, this only authenticates results as coming from > specific users, rather than authenticating that the result is correct and > genuine.
Your analysis is correct. > > For instance, how can a new user who has had no previous contact with GIMPS > prove that they have completed a Lucas-Lehmer test correctly? If we were able to do this with 100% certainty, then we would not need to run double-checks! Don't forget that a small fraction of the results submitted in perfect good faith by people who are making no attempt whatsoever to cheat will be incorrect by reason of a hardware or software glitch. In the final analysis, the best deterrent to anyone who is deliberately submitting "concocted" results is the knowledge that they will (eventually) be caught out through the double-checking mechanism. One way of tightening the procedure would be for interim residues to be logged as well as the final residue. As I've stated in the past, this would also enable a saving in effort by allowing investigation when a double-check run disagrees rather than having to continue the run through to the end. Regards Brian Beesley _________________________________________________________________________ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
