[seqfan] Re: Announcements: faster search, new Sys Admin

[Frank Adams-watters]

One probably wants a minimum on that. If the user searches for a sequence of 7 decimal digits and does not find it, searching for the final 5 digits is unlikely to be useful.

Franklin T. Adams-Watters


-----Original Message-----
From: Neil Sloane <njasloane at gmail.com>
To: Sequence Fanatics Discussion list <seqfan at list.seqfan.eu>
Sent: Tue, Jun 25, 2019 1:47 pm
Subject: [seqfan] Re: Announcements: faster search, new Sys Admin

EVERYONE who uses the OEIS regularly should know to omit the first 2 or 3
terms before doing a search.  This is essential.

However, many people who are using
the OEIS for the first time don't know this, and I agree that this is
a major problem.

Only the other day an expert in knot theory
reviewing a paper, thought it contained a new sequence,
simply because he did not omit an initial 0 when looking it up.
So he missed the earlier work on the problem.

So I agree with Brad's suggestion.  In fact I would strengthen it to say

Could there be a post-condition on search returns that checks
for null result and on finding nothing, searches again without first two
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 Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 2:01 PM Brad Klee <bradklee at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Russ,
>
> Another idea after < https://oeis.org/hints.html > is to automate around
> the problem of missing first terms. I just got burnt on searching today:
>
> 0, 1, -2, -4, -20, -132, -1008
>
> and find it non-intuitive to search for:
>
> 1, -2, -4, -20, -132, -1008
>
> instead. Could there be a post-condition on search returns that checks
> for null result and on finding nothing, searches again without first term?
>
> We have seen this time and again, but maybe now we can quit blaming
> users for their own stupidity?
>
> --Brad
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 4:19 PM Russ Cox <rsc at swtch.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 1:08 PM Neil Sloane <njasloane at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Russ Cox has speeded up the search for when the query only contains
> > > numerical data. Now even sequences of 0's and 1's get a lightning-fast
> > > answer. Superseeker is also much faster.
> >
> >
> > As part of this, I have been looking at actual searches, and I've noticed
> > that there is a steady stream of people searching for space-separated
> > number lists like:
> >
> >     1 2 3 6 11 23 47 106 235
> >     "1 2 3 6 11 23 47 106 235"
> >
> > My guess is that these searches intend to search for that exact sequence
> > (this being the Online Encyclopedia of Integer SEQUENCES and all),
> > and that despite the hints and warnings about using comma syntax
> > instead, many people don't realize what is going on.
> >
> > As an experiment, I've changed the rules on the server to turn three
> > or more space-separated numbers into a sequence search, as if they'd
> > been comma-separated. So now these are all the same search:
> >
> >     1,2,3,6,11,23,47,106,235
> >     1 2 3 6 11 23 47 106 235
> >     "1 2 3 6 11 23 47 106 235"
> >
> > To search for those numbers appearing all together in a sequence entry
> > but not necessarily in order, they can be quoted individually, as in
> > ["1" "2" "3" "6" "11" "23" "47" "106" "235"]. And of course if the order
> > is known but not where index gaps are, there are always subsequence
> > searches like:
> >
> >     subseq:2,6,47,106
> >     2,3,6,__,235
> >
> > The hints page https://oeis.org/hints.html is updated with the new
> > state of the world.
> >
> > Please let me know if you think the new behavior is problematic or
> > can be improved.
> >
> > Best,
> > Russ
> >
> > --
> > Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>
> --
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>

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