A109461(n) = A000616(n-1) for n>1 ?

[franktaw at netscape.net]

Please disregard my earlier message.  Now that I see the definition of 
canalizing (it's in A102449 - thanks to Mitch Harris for pointing it 
out), I can see that there is no problem.

And the answer to Max's question is yes, they are the same.  If there 
is more than one canalizing variable, they must all force the function 
value to the same thing.  Using the NPN equivalence, we can force the 
value forced to to be false, the canalizing value of the variable to be 
false; we can also move one of them to the first position.  The 
function is then these variables anded with each other and with an 
arbitrary function of the other variables up to NP equivalence - we 
can't negate the final value again from the NPN equivalence because 
that would change the canalizing normalization we performed.  This is 
equivalent to the function being the first variable anded with a 
function of the remaining variables up to NP equivalence; hence 
A000616(n-1).

Franklin T. Adams-Watters


-----Original Message-----
From: Max Alekseyev <maxale at gmail.com>

Dear seqfans, 
 
Is it true that A109461(n) = A000616(n-1) for n>1 ? 
All currently listed elements of A109461 support this equality. 
If it is not true, what is the smallest counterexample? 
 
Thanks, 
Max