[seqfan] Re: Inconsistencies in OEIS

Fri Sep 18 10:04:47 CEST 2015

It is conceivable that the terms could be in the b-file but too large
to list in the sequence line.

On 18 September 2015 at 20:01, Frank Adams-Watters
<franktaw at netscape.net> wrote:
> No, then more terms should be copied from the b-file, instead of adding the "more" keyword..
>
> Franklin T. Adams-Watters
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Corneth <davidacorneth at gmail.com>
> To: Sequence Fanatics Discussion list <seqfan at list.seqfan.eu>
> Sent: Fri, Sep 18, 2015 2:29 am
> Subject: [seqfan] Re: Inconsistencies in OEIS
>
>
> I think More and Full can come together. Suppose a sequence has some
> 1,000
> elements, all listed in a b-file, but the data-field only lists 2
> elements
> (6 characters) or so. Then both Full and More apply to the
> sequence.
>
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 7:46 PM, Neil Sloane <njasloane at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> There is also nothing wrong with the combination less+more
>>
>> Less
> means we have enough of this kind of sequence, while more
>> means this
> particular sequence needs more terms
>>
>> Best regards
>> Neil
>>
>> Neil J. A.
> Sloane, President, OEIS Foundation.
>> 11 South Adelaide Avenue, Highland Park,
> NJ 08904, USA.
>> Also Visiting Scientist, Math. Dept., Rutgers University,
> Piscataway, NJ.
>> Phone: 732 828 6098; home page: http://NeilSloane.com
>> Email:
> njasloane at gmail.com
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Neil Sloane
> <njasloane at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > "fini" and "more" is perfectly OK.
>> >
>> > It
> would mean that the sequence is finite, but we need more terms.
>> >
>> > [You
> were probably thinking of "full" and "more",
>> > which indeed are
> incompatible]
>> >
>> > Best regards
>> > Neil
>> >
>> > Neil J. A. Sloane,
> President, OEIS Foundation.
>> > 11 South Adelaide Avenue, Highland Park, NJ
> 08904, USA.
>> > Also Visiting Scientist, Math. Dept., Rutgers University,
> Piscataway, NJ.
>> > Phone: 732 828 6098; home page: http://NeilSloane.com
>> >
> Email: njasloane at gmail.com
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Frank
> Adams-Watters <
>> > franktaw at netscape.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Agreed. Actually,
> even "fini" and "more" is suspicious, but there are
>> >> valid cases for it.
>>
>>>
>> >> I tend to think that "nice" and "core" really are incompatible with
>> >>
> "obsc" and "uned". Once we figure out what the sequence actually is is
>> soon
>>
>>> enough to apply those labels.
>> >>
>> >> Franklin T. Adams-Watters
>> >>
>> >>
> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Charles Greathouse
> <charles.greathouse at case.edu>
>> >> To: Sequence Fanatics Discussion list
> <seqfan at list.seqfan.eu>
>> >> Sent: Thu, Sep 17, 2015 11:55 am
>> >> Subject:
> [seqfan] Re: Inconsistencies in OEIS
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I can imagine nice with any
> of obsc, unkn, and uned. I've seen
>> submissions
>> >> which
>> >> were definitely
> nice sequences but which required large amounts of
>> >> editing;
>> >> without
> the editing the sequence would have been nice and uned.
>> >> It's harder to
>> >>
> imagine an obsc/unkn sequence being nice, but suppose the
>> >> supersingular
> primes
>> >> were submitted (sufficiently long ago that they were
>> >> unknown),
> but with a
>> >> tantalizing description hinting at moonshine. Not
>> >> likely,
> for sure, but probably
>> >> not wrong by definition.
>> >>
>> >> I might argue
> that probation is incompatible with
>> >> core, though: we wouldn't
>> >> delete a
> core sequence, but that's the purpose of
>> >> probation. But maybe
>> >> there's
> a scenario like the above I haven't considered.
>> >>
>> >> I
>> >> did think of
> another forbidden combination, though: full and more.
>> >>
>> >> Charles
>> >>
> Greathouse
>> >> Analyst/Programmer
>> >> Case Western Reserve University
>> >>
>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 17,
>> >> 2015 at 12:35 PM, Max Alekseyev <maxale at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Similarly, "nice"
>> >> and "uned", or "nice" and "unkn" is
> probably is a no-no
>> >> > combination.
>> >> >
>> >> > On
>> >> Thu, Sep 17, 2015
> at 11:43 AM, Frank Adams-Watters <
>> >> > franktaw at netscape.net
>> >> > >
>> >>
> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > "nice" should also never appear with "obsc".
>> >> > >
>>
>>> > > Franklin T.
>> >> Adams-Watters
>> >> > >
>> >> > > -----Original
> Message-----
>> >> > > From: Charles Greathouse
>> >>
> <charles.greathouse at case.edu>
>> >> > > To: Sequence Fanatics Discussion list
>>
>>> <seqfan at list.seqfan.eu>
>> >> > > Sent: Thu, Sep 17, 2015 10:30 am
>> >> > >
> Subject:
>> >> [seqfan] Re: Inconsistencies in OEIS
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > >
> If there are any more
>> >> combinations of keywords that should trigger
>> >> > >
> warnings
>> >> > > I'd like to know.
>> >> I currently have:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
> - "full" without "fini" -->
>> >> > > warning (never
>> >> occurs).
>> >> > > > -
> "tabl" and "tabf" together --> warning (occurred 1
>> >> > > time,
>> >> fixed
> now).
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Let's see. Keywords "recycled", "allocated", and
>> >>
> "allocating"
>> >> > > should never
>> >> > > appear with other keywords. Really
>>
>>> keyword:dead should also appear
>> >> > > alone,
>> >> > > but in practice
> there are cases
>> >> where it does not (I count 54).
>> >> > >
>> >> > > kw:nice
>>
>>> > > should never appear with
>> >> kw:less.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > kw:easy should
> never appear with
>> >> > > kw:hard.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > kw:nonn
>> >> should never
> appear with kw:sign.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > The keywords done, dupe,
>> >> > > huge,
> and
>> >> part have been deprecated and should not
>> >> > > be used in any
>> >> >
>> sequences.
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> > Charles Greathouse
>> >> > >
> Analyst/Programmer
>> >> > > Case Western Reserve
>> >> > >
>> >> University
>> >> >
>>
>> >> > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 2:01 AM, Sidney Cadot
>> >>
> <sidney at jigsaw.nl>
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > Hi,
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> I fixed 21 sequences
>> >> that had such an error. But you might
>> >> > > check
> that
>> >> > > > > I caught them
>> >> all.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > It seems so -
> and from what I can tell you
>> >> > > also took care
>> >> of all
>> >> > > >
> entries with superfluous commas, so that should care of
>> >> > > issues
>> >>
> (P11)
>> >> > > > and (P13) on the list.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > It will take ~ 1.5
> weeks for my
>> >> local
>> >> > > copy of the database to refresh
>> >> > > > the
> entire database, which will
>> >> allow the
>> >> > > parser to check the fixes
>>
>>> > > > automatically; this is because I
>> >> get all data via
>> >> > > HTTP
> and I throttle
>> >> > > > access to under a thousand
>> >> requests per hour. In
> fact
>> >> > > while starting
>> >> > > > this project I went beyond
>> >> that,
> which may show up in the
>> >> > > server usage
>> >> > > > statistics and I hope
> this
>> >> hasn't cause performance issues -- if
>> >> > > so I
>> >> > > >
> apologize.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > If
>> >> there is a more direct way to access
> the data that
>> >> > > doesn't burden
>> >> > > > the
>> >> server as much, I'd be
> happy to implement it. Also, if
>> >> > > there is
>> >> > > >
>> >> interest to
> automate the process of detecting issues in the
>> >> > > database,
>> >> > > >
>>
>>> I will be happy to hand over my scripts once they have
>> >> > > stabilized.
>>
>>> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > There was one that had both tabl and tabf keywords.
>>
>>> > > > > I
>> >> > > don't know
>> >> if you considered that an error - it is
>>
>>> > > >
>> >> > > > I added that condition as
>> >> >
>> >> > a check and re-ran,
> A212013 seems to have
>> >> > > > been the only entry that had
>> >> this
>> >> > >
> particular combination.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > If there are any more
> combinations
>> >> of keywords that
>> >> > > should trigger
>> >> > > > warnings
> I'd like to know. I currently
>> >> have:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > - "full"
>> >> > >
> without "fini" --> warning (never occurs).
>> >> > > >
>> >> - "tabl" and "tabf"
> together -->
>> >> > > warning (occurred 1 time, fixed now).
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> > > Kind regards
>> >> > > >  Sidney
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >>
> _______________________________________________
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Seqfan
> Mailing list
>> >> -
>> >> > > http://list.seqfan.eu/
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
> Seqfan
>> >> > > Mailing list
>> >> - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>>
>>> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> > >
>>
>>> > > Seqfan Mailing list -
>> >> http://list.seqfan.eu/
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >
>> >> > Seqfan
> Mailing list -
>> >> http://list.seqfan.eu/
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
> _______________________________________________
>> >>
>> >> Seqfan
>> >> Mailing
> list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
> _______________________________________________
>> >>
>> >> Seqfan Mailing list -
> http://list.seqfan.eu/
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Seqfan Mailing list -
> http://list.seqfan.eu/
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Seqfan
> Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/