[seqfan] Question about A005493

Daniel kimpire at yahoo.com
Thu Nov 8 10:03:26 CET 2018

Hi all,

Why is the primary definition for A005493 based on n+1 instead of n? Might it not be better to base it on n and change the offset? Or is defined this way to make the offset consistent with that of some other sequence? In that case, is there an alternative primary definition that would be based on n?

Daniel Sterman

More information about the SeqFan mailing list