[seqfan] Re: Poll: Sequences Suitable For Crunchers vs. Formula Finding Algorithms
charles.greathouse at case.edu
Wed Aug 25 23:44:10 CEST 2010
In my interpretation, they're mutually exclusive, essentially
different points along a scale. "Hard" is used when coming up with
terms is really hard: someone who extends the sequence might well get
a paper out of it. (They may not, of course -- but still, much effort
is required.) "More" is used when the terms are desired, but the
effort -- computer or otherwise -- is smaller.
Similarly, I see nice, less, and dumb as a spectrum.
Case Western Reserve University
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Donald Alan Morrison
<donmorrison at gmail.com> wrote:
> Please consider the following two OEIS(F) searches:
> keyword:more -keyword:base keyword:nice keyword:hard
> (55 results)
> keyword:more -keyword:base keyword:nice -keyword:hard
> (205 results)
> I notice none of the core sequences have keyword:more. I cannot
> presume to understand why/when "nice" and "more" are edited.
> My Question: Is there a keyword or set of keywords that would help
> divide the dichotomy proposed in my subject line?
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
More information about the SeqFan