Preventing Duplicate Sequences

wouter meeussen wouter.meeussen at
Fri May 9 23:45:31 CEST 2003

If computing power were ever to become cheap,
I would recommend checking new (and old) sequences
against Superseeker (intentional capitalisation).
I'm shure lots of GF and recursion relations and Transforms
would surface.
The corpus of 'known sequences' would become more
coherent and interesting.
I've suggested before expanding the text search capabilities
to encompass stuff like
"a(n+1)=" or " x^x^x "
and getting rid of
"Sorry, wrong format! That window should contain a string of letters and

Data mining the OEIS is a young field of 'observational maths'.

sequentially loving,


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jud McCranie" <judmccr at>
To: <seqfan at>
Sent: Friday, May 09, 2003 10:51 PM
Subject: Re: Preventing Duplicate Sequences

> At 04:27 PM 5/9/2003, Rick Shepherd wrote:
> >The big question is:  Should there be an automated check at the time we
> >submit new sequences to issue a warning (to the submitter and would-be
> >updater) if an identical sequence (or nearly so) is already in the
> It probably isn't too hard to check for duplicates throughout the whole
> database and report ones whose terms match.  Then a person would have to
> look at the descriptions to determine if they are the same.

More information about the SeqFan mailing list