A128301

[hv at crypt.org]

Thanks, Hugo!
in the meantime, 
I've found (silly as usual)
error in my code.
Thanks and sorry to bother you all,
Zak
--- hv at crypt.org wrote:

> zak seidov <zakseidov at yahoo.com> wrote:
> :Neil, Rick , seqfans,
> :My numbers are:
> :1, 3, 9, 17, 40, 56, 90, 114, 164, 253, 289, 404,
> 484,
> :533, 634, 783, 973,1031, 1233, 1373, 1452, 1683,
> 1842,
> :2112, 2483, 2676, 2772, 2938, 3024, 3184, 
> :3795, 3955, 4195, 4290, 4701, 4792, 5063, 5348,
> 5515,
> :5773, 6043, 6124, 6592, 6674, 6842, 6926, 7460,
> 8036,
> :8230, 8329, 8535, 8829, 8926, 9426, 9725, 
> :10028, 10307, 10411, 10707, 10909
> :and they  differ from A128301 starting with 2772
> on.
> :Can anyone please check/get correct results,
> :thanks,
> :Zak
> :
> :%I A128301
> :%S A128301
>
:1,3,9,17,40,56,90,114,164,253,289,404,484,533,634,783,973,1031,1233,1373,1452,1683,1842,2112,2483,2676,2779,2995,3108,3320,4124,4384,4775,4926,5593,5741,6172,6644,6962,7448,7955,8108,8978,9147,9512,9697,10842
> :%N A128301 Indices of squares (of primes) in the
> :semiprimes.
> The following code agrees with the existing values,
> not with yours:
> perl -MMath::Pari=factorint,PARI -wle 'my $c = 0; my
> $s = PARI 1; while (1) { ++$s; my($sp, $si) =
> @{factorint($s)}; next if @$sp > 2; next if $si->[0]
> + (@$si > 1 ? $si->[1] : 0) != 2; ++$c; print "$s =>
> $c" if @$sp == 1}'
> 
 
> Hugo
> 



       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. 
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545433





------ Original Message ------

> Dear Sequence-fans,
> 
> sequence A71879 has the following cryptic comment by E Deutsch which 
> I do not understand.:
> 
> 	COMMENT 	
> 
> Number of ordered trees with n edges and having nonleaf nodes 
> of outdegree 0 or 1. - 
> Emeric Deutsch (deutsch(AT)duke.poly.edu), Nov 03 2002
> 
> I tried to contact him without success.
> Has anybody a clue?
> 
> My problems origin mainly in the expression "non-leaf nodes of
> outdegree 0": these are leaves or I am an idiot (of course, both
> statements are possibly true but one of them should not be false).
> 
> Roland Bacher
> 

If we change "0 or 1" to "1 or 3" the comment is accurate.

Christian