[seqfan] Re: Extending erroneous A094333 ?

[franktaw at netscape.net]

One should probably also add the word "proper" before "multiple" in 
these definitions.

Franklin T. Adams-Watters

-----Original Message-----
From: Giovanni Resta <g.resta at iit.cnr.it>

On 07/22/2013 06:19 PM, Paul Tek wrote:
> Dear SeqFans,
>
> I would like to extend the sequence A094333:
>    NAME:   a(1) = 1, a(n) = least multiple of a(n-1) which is a 
concatenation
of successive numbers.
>    DATA:   1, 2, 4, 8, 56, 5152, 17181920, 479839479840, 
552587148319552587148320

You are obviously right, the sequence definition does not match the 
terms.

However, the politics with sequences which have been in OEIS for long
is, if possible and if makes sense, to modify the definition rather 
than
the numbers.

In this case the right thing to do is to add this clause to the Name:
"Terms with more than one digit must be a concatenation of at least two
successive numbers."

Indeed this is what NJAS has done for the sister sequence A094334.

Then you can create a new sequence with a better name and fitting data.

Giovanni



_______________________________________________

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