artificial sequences deleted

[Frank Ellermann]

cino hilliard wrote:

> some kind  block list like in emal.

Hi, that would be difficult, and probably wrong.  If you take
the former A076788 as an example, which was "uned"(ited) and
"obsc"(ure) with a missing "base" keyword:  Maybe you or
somebody else finds the same sequence with a better or less
obscure description, or references in the literature (then
it would be not more "artificial" by definition).  Nothing was
wrong with this sequence (as far as I understood it, limited
to missing "base"), no real reason to block it.

One of the sequences I always wanted to create is the sequence
of potential EIS-sequences using EIS-format (the 3 lines) and
N characters per line.  It's not straight forward to calculate
A(N), because there are commata and other minor problems like
line wrap, but the relevant A(69) is ___H___U___G___E___

And A(69) - 1,000,000 for the potential block list is also
too big to handle.  Just for fun, A(1) = 10, the digits, no
room for comma, therefore only one line.  A(2) = 100 for 0,,99
in one line, + 10 * x for "0," up to "9," in the first line,
and x = 100 + 10 * y, with y = 100 (same argument), therefore
A(2) = 100 + 10 * ( 100 + 10 * 100 ) = 11100.  The next term
A(3) ~ 1000 + 100 * ( 1000 + 100 * 1000 ) = 10,101,000 for
lines with three characters is already bigger than the total
number of A000000 up to A999999.  The real A(3) is different,
because %S x, %T d,d and %S x, %T d, %U d are equivalent, one
term x = 0..99 plus two one-digit terms d.

                        Bye, Frank