[seqfan] Re: nice base-dependent sequence

[zak seidov]

Dear Doug,
thanks a lot!

I suggest you to submit b-file (100 terms or somewhat likes?),
as Neil requested.

It'll free me from running hopelessly Mmca for hours and hours.
With this I actually give up.

Thanks again,
Zak

--- On Sat, 5/29/10, Douglas McNeil <mcneil at hku.hk> wrote:

> From: Douglas McNeil <mcneil at hku.hk>
> Subject: [seqfan] Re: nice base-dependent sequence
> To: "Sequence Fanatics Discussion list" <seqfan at list.seqfan.eu>
> Date: Saturday, May 29, 2010, 12:05 PM
> I can confirm the terms up to 49.
> 
> > {50, 504316802 - not necessarily minimal!}
> > {51-56, 507992408 -  not necessarily minimal!}
> 
> I agree they aren't (all) minimal.  I get
> 
> 50 134316008
> 51 138756006
> 
> As for the "hard" keyword, I think I'm with Hans on this
> one.
> Requiring evidence of computational complexity beyond some
> limit seems
> narrower than OEIS custom.  Hard is already used for
> lots of sequences
> where it's just that the best known approach is
> inefficient.
> 
> 
> Doug
> 
> -- 
> Department of Earth Sciences
> University of Hong Kong
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>