Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

Math Supercomputing Science Finds Optimal 25-Mark Golomb Ruler 265

Posted by timothy
from the unique-and-in-duplicate dept.
kpearson writes "'s 8-year-old OGR-25 distributed computing project has just proven conclusively that the predicted shortest 25-mark Golomb ruler is optimal. 'The total length of the ruler is 480, with marks at positions: 0 12 29 39 72 91 146 157 160 161 166 191 207 214 258 290 316 354 372 394 396 431 459 467 480. (This ruler may alternatively be expressed in terms of the distance between those positions, which is how dnetc displays them: 12-17-10-33-19-...).' 124,387 people participated in the project and two people found the shortest ruler, one on October 10, 2007 and the other on March 24, 2008."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted. Finds Optimal 25-Mark Golomb Ruler

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 25, 2008 @10:06PM (#25513891) used to have a very vibrant community, with several projects on-going at one time. But lately, things haven't been going so well for them. The prize funds for their RC5-72 challenge were recently yanked. And the only other project they had on-going was this OGR-25 project.

    Does anyone know if they'll offer further projects in the near future? Many people I know have moved on to BOINC-based [] distributed computing projects, instead of sticking with

  • Every number I plugged in could be measured as a length between 2 numbers in that set. But according to wikipedia, no perfect ruler exists for over 5. And this has 25. So it's not perfect.

    So does anyone have a list of numbers that can't be measured as distances between these? I'd rather not calculate it myself.

The trouble with being punctual is that people think you have nothing more important to do.