[seqfan] Re: Policy on near-duplicates

[Jonathan Sondow]

Alonso Del Arte makes a very important point!

Here is an example from my own experience. I neglected to start my entry in the search box with a(2) and searched for 1, 2, 6, 42, 1806. Thus failed to find A054377 until late in the process of writing a paper on the sequence prefixed by "1". That caused a much bigger change in the paper than if I had found A054377 early on. 

========================================
Dr. Jonathan Sondow
Email: jsondow at alumni.princeton.edu
URL: http://home.earthlink.net/~jsondow/
========================================

-----Original Message-----
From: Alonso Del Arte <alonso.delarte at gmail.com>

Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 14:58:43 
To: Sequence Fanatics Discussion list<seqfan at list.seqfan.eu>
Subject: [seqfan] Re: Policy on near-duplicates


Another common situation is when a(1) differs but all the other terms
are the same, due to different approaches in handling 1's unique
qualities. Some people know enough to start their entry in the search
box with a(2) or even a(3), but there will certainly be others who put
start with a(1) and it would certainly benefit them to get a result
with a cross-reference to the sequence with the different a(1).

Alonso del Arte

On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 12:45 PM, N. J. A. Sloane <njas at research.att.com> wrote:
>
> If there are 2 sequences in the OEIS which are different
> but closely related (for example, one might be obtained
> by adding 1 to every term of the other), then we keep both,
> but provide cross-references.
>
> The main reason is that (obviously) there are two schools
> of though about which is the best version.
>
> Also my preference is to keep a sequence once it is in the OEIS,
> unless it is wrong.
>
> Neil
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>


_______________________________________________

Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/