TMBR: May 2026: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
GRF |
RobinCodes (talk | contribs) →Holdouts: Added BB(2,6) progress |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
*[[BB(2,6)]] | *[[BB(2,6)]] | ||
**Andrew Ducharme reduced the number of holdouts from 536,112 to ''' | **Andrew Ducharme reduced the number of holdouts from 536,112 to '''527,232''' via Enumerate.py and TM-enum, a '''1.66%''' reduction.<sup>[https://discord.com/channels/960643023006490684/1084047886494470185/1500218448951775383][https://discord.com/channels/960643023006490684/1084047886494470185/1501436678823477368 <nowiki>[7]</nowiki>]</sup> | ||
*[[BB(2,7)]] | *[[BB(2,7)]] | ||
** Terry Ligocki enumerated 20K more subtasks, increasing the number of holdouts to '''749,156,843'''. A total of 24K subtasks out of the 1 million subtasks (or '''24%''') have been enumerated.<sup>[https://discord.com/channels/960643023006490684/1084047886494470185/1492652604088516659 <nowiki>[ | ** Terry Ligocki enumerated 20K more subtasks, increasing the number of holdouts to '''749,156,843'''. A total of 24K subtasks out of the 1 million subtasks (or '''24%''') have been enumerated.<sup>[https://discord.com/channels/960643023006490684/1084047886494470185/1492652604088516659 <nowiki>[8]</nowiki>]</sup> | ||
[[Category:This Month in Beaver Research|2026-05]] | [[Category:This Month in Beaver Research|2026-05]] | ||
Revision as of 05:42, 6 May 2026
| Prev: April 2026 | This Month in Beaver Research | Next: June 2026 |
This edition of TMBR is in progress and has not yet been released. Please add any notes you think may be relevant (including in the form a of a TODO with a link to any relevant Discord discussion).
BB Adjacent
- Some new cryptids were hand-built:
- Size 56, by Shawn on 2 May (simulating 5x+1 problem starting at 7).[1]
- Size 49, by aparker, star and Shawn on 3 May (simulating Brocard's problem).[2]
- The first non-trivial divergent GRF was found (size 15). It halts iff there exists some n ≥ 1 such that n+3 divides .[3] aparker[4] and star[5] proved that there is no such n.