# [seqfan] Re: OEIS wiki and editing, Boubaker affair.

Joerg Arndt arndt at jjj.de
Sun Dec 6 00:04:21 CET 2009

```seq. A162180 appears to use some q-generalization
of the polynomials defined in (second link)
http://www.epjap.org/index.php?option=article&access=standard&Itemid=129&url=/articles/epjap/pdf/2009/05/ap08483.pdf

There (second page):
B_0(x)=1
B_1(x)=x
B_2(x)=x^2+2
B_m(x)=x*B_{m-1}(x)-B__{m-2}(x) (for m>2)
(these appear to match A135929)

I do not see what the q-generalization has to be.
The notation in the seq. like e.g. B_4[q-2](X)
is not defined anywhere(?).

Indeed, I cannot see any connection with the paper
(which is just a note with several references to
applied physics papers and notably to A138034).

If the seq. is edited into something well-defined
(and non-obscure) we could keep it, though it
appears to be self-promotion (IMHO).

The seq. appears to be a simple periodic seq:
? ggf([-1, 3, -2, -1, -1, 3, -2, -1, -1, 3, -2, -1, -1, 3, -2, -1, -1, 3, -2, -1, -1, 3, -2, -1, -1, 3, -2])
(-x^3 - 2*x^2 + 3*x - 1)/(-x^4 + 1)

If this holds, the definition should be brought
into something like "period-4 seq [-1, 3, -2, -1]".
And just a comment about the Boubaker polynomials
_might_ be kept (but I do not see why this
would be of any significance).
(The very same for A160242).

cheers,  jj

P.S.: A138034 might qualify as self-promotion.

```