[seqfan] Re: Sequences based on theory given in a blog.

Charles Greathouse charles.greathouse at case.edu
Thu Jan 17 07:29:22 CET 2013


I think that's absolutely acceptable. Of course you should give attribution
by (at least) including the links, as you suggested.

Perhaps you should point them to the sequences once submitted in case they
want to comment, check the entry, or the like. I submitted a sequence
perhaps a year ago which was based on a blog post (though the idea was
decades older) and I sent the blog's author an email to let him know and to
ask if it looked right, being an area outside my specialty.

Charles Greathouse
Analyst/Programmer
Case Western Reserve University


On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 12:33 AM, L. Edson Jeffery <lejeffery2 at gmail.com>wrote:

> I found a couple of interesting sequences in two related blogs on the
> internet. One blog is by a mathematics professor and the other blog is by
> his/her students. There were no proofs given for any of the assertions,
> although claims of having proofs were made, and the details are a bit
> sketchy, but the formulas work correctly. One sequence is based on a new
> function that is also interesting. My first reaction was the thought of
> submitting the sequences to OEIS myself, but I have to ask:
>
> Is it proper (in terms of OEIS policy) to submit sequences like these, and
> are blog posts good (or adequate) enough for the references section, since
> at least some form of attribution should be given to the bloggers?
>
> Finally, anyone who wants the links to the blogs, please let me know: the
> sequences are worthy of more study by someone more knowledgeable.
>
> Ed Jeffery
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>



More information about the SeqFan mailing list