[seqfan] A306861

Hans Havermann gladhobo at bell.net
Tue May 17 13:18:02 CEST 2022


I've had a private message from someone pointing out that "A306861 is in fact a subsequence of A272232". Except that A306861 uses -1 for its nonexisting terms and A272232 uses 0. The latter is the older sequence. Should A306861's nonexisting terms be modified to 0 before commenting on the relationship?

More information about the SeqFan mailing list