[seqfan] Re: Proposal for a new keyword

[Felix Fröhlich]

Okay, thanks for the response.

Best regards
Felix

2017-11-05 20:20 GMT+01:00 Neil Sloane <njasloane at gmail.com>:

> Right now it would be too much trouble to add a new keyword, so that won't
> happen.
>
> Also, "conj" would immediately be applied to sequences where there are
> conjectured formulas, and there are about 50000 of them.  So it would also
> be confusing and more work for the editors when we have to tell people, No,
> that is not what "conj" is for.
>
> The best thing is to improve the Index to the OEIS.  See especially the
> page
> https://oeis.org/wiki/Index_to_OEIS:_Section_Con.
> I have created a line there for your list: see:
> conjectured sequences (21): ...
>
>
> 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 Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Felix Fröhlich <felix.froe at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Dear SeqFans,
> >
> > I know I brought the topic of adding additional keywords to the OEIS up
> > once in the past, but here we go again. In my opinion, adding new
> keywords
> > to the OEIS should be done cautiously and sparsely, in order to avoid
> > "keyword clutter".
> >
> > However, one keyword that I would like to see is a keyword like "conj"
> (or
> > whatever letter combination may be appropriate).
> >
> > This keyword would be for sequences where the terms are only
> conjecturally
> > correct, but there is no proof so far. This would make finding such
> > sequences much easier and also make clear to any reader that the terms
> are
> > only conjectured.
> >
> > How would this differ from keyword "unkn"? My understanding is that
> "unkn"
> > is for sequences where it is unclear what the original motivation or
> > definition of the sequence is. In contrast, if a sequence has keyword
> > "conj" it does not necessarily mean that the definition is unclear, but
> > that the terms are not rigorously proven.
> >
> > Some examples where the keyword could be used:
> >
> > A020497, A020665, A023108, A051021, A074981, A076335, A094004, A101036,
> > A118278, A134162, A216063, A226613, A226629, A236321, A237880, A293142
> >
> > There are probably more examples. I do not know how difficult it would be
> > from a technical perspective to add a new keyword to the existing ones.
> Do
> > others, especially Neil, think this would be a useful addition?
> >
> > Thanks for any feedback
> >
> > Best regards
> > Felix
> >
> > --
> > Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
> >
>
> --
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>