[seqfan] Re: Lattice Squares

[franktaw at netscape.net]

And, without going into detailed calculations, one would expect this to 
be a 4th degree polynomial: there are two degrees of freedom for the 
top left corner, and two more for the top right corner; the remaining 
corners are then determined.  So A014820 is certainly correct.

Franklin T. Adams-Watters

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Mathar <mathar at strw.leidenuniv.nl>

Continuing on
http://list.seqfan.eu/pipermail/seqfan/2009-July/001915.html

ftaw> From seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu Sat Jul 18 18:36:00 2009
ftaw> To: seqfan at list.seqfan.eu
ftaw> Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 12:28:35 -0400
ftaw> From: franktaw at netscape.net
ftaw> Subject: [seqfan]  Lattice Squares
ftaw> ...
ftaw> Richard, you appear to be assuming that the squares are aligned 
with
ftaw> the lattice.  If we don't make this assumption, there are two 
more for
ftaw> n=2:
ftaw>
ftaw> .X...
ftaw> ....X
ftaw> .....
ftaw> X....
ftaw> ...X.
ftaw>
ftaw> and its mirror image.

...this explains all of the difference. If I run a blind full
search including squares with non-horizontal or non-vertical sides,
I also get 1,8,33,96,225,456,...,53600

...

Richard J. Mathar