[seqfan] Re: polyotessamino defn in A059573

Peter Munn techsubs at pearceneptune.co.uk
Fri May 24 22:11:38 CEST 2019

On Fri, May 24, 2019 6:03 pm, Richard J. Mathar wrote:
> pm> Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 07:17:13 +0100
> pm> From: "Peter Munn" <techsubs at pearceneptune.co.uk>
> pm>
> pm> I get 8 if the definition means that you cannot use only
> pm> 1 domino if there is a configuration with 2 dominoes, and
> pm> you fix the 4-omino in position and count different ways
> pm> of placing the dominoes.
> This explains why A059573(4,2)=8, but then I get A0539537(5,2)=35,
> not 34. For the illustration see
> http://www.mpia.de/home/mathar/progs/a059573.pdf

I calculated A059573(5,2) without looking at your illustration and concur
that it would be 35 by my reverse-engineered definition; but I agree with
the published A059573(5,3) = 18 and the rest of the row.

> Is A059573 just not correct ?

I currently suspect that a hand calculation overlooked a configuration, or
maybe a transcription error 18 years ago. Has anyone tried re-calculating
the values for A059573(6,2) or A059573(6,3) yet? I agree with the other
published values on row 6.

Best Regards,


More information about the SeqFan mailing list