[seqfan] Re: sequence warnings?

Jonathan Post jvospost3 at gmail.com
Wed Sep 29 18:33:00 CEST 2010

I accept the caning in the positive intent with which njas applied it.

I have made errors in some recent submissions.  This is to be
discouraged, for the good of all of us.

I am not making an excuse when I say that I made errors in submitting
"Numbers n whose sum of factors is a triangular number" by analogue to
the equivalent with squares.  After composing from inspection of the
b-list of the sigma_1 sequence,  my meta-mistake was in not asking on
seqfans second, after having first not seen it on search (since the
search failed because of my own errors).

Nor am I excused because seqfans later fed me the corrections, as well
as corrections for the analogues for pentagonal numbers, and hexagonal

I was in too much of a hurry to get to the main diagonal: A[n,n] = the
n-th number whose sum of factors is an n-gonal number.

njas is right, and has been of enormous generosity to me in helping to
improve the quality of my submissions.

I am sheepish because I have told some of "the usual suspects" to slow
down, spend more time before submitting, and better connect their
submissions to the on-line and paper literature.

I was wrong.  njas was right.  Period.

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 8:59 AM, N. J. A. Sloane <njas at research.att.com> wrote:
> Doug, there are two or three people whose submissions almost
> always contain errors. How would you suggest that we handle this?
> Neil
>>A recent sequence has (what seems) an unusual warning that the
> contributor's sequences are often in error.  Is this really the way to
> go?
> _______________________________________________
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/

More information about the SeqFan mailing list