[seqfan] Re: Sequence from ChatGPT

[M. F. Hasler]

I don't think this should be in the OEIS.
I mean of course the "correct"sequence, no one was ever considering to
submit machine generated nonsense.

Otherwise we have to include all sequences of  "integers that are the
concatenation of a term in A with a term in B" for at least all "core"
sequences A and B.
- Maximilian

On Sun, Apr 2, 2023, 13:48 Alonso Del Arte <alonso.delarte at gmail.com> wrote:

> Proofreading might be a more productive use of ChatGPT here, e.g., "how
> would you explain that numbers with property *P* also have property *Q*?"
> Such a prompt might generate more useful content than asking it to come up
> with an entire new entry from scratch.
>
> By the way, has anyone tried looking up something on the OEIS using a
> mobile device rather than a desktop computer, e.g., a Samsung Galaxy S8+?
> If you don't know how to fix that problem, ChatGPT might be able to help
> you.
>
> Al
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 12:37 PM Arthur O'Dwyer <arthur.j.odwyer at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 10:43 AM <israel at math.ubc.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > Out of curiosity, I asked ChatGPT:
> > >
> > > Write a new sequence for the Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences
> > >
> > > The result was
> > >
> > [nonsense]
> >
> > Please don't submit machine-generated spam to OEIS. As I understand it,
> > OEIS is supposed to be a mathematical resource. If it ends up full of
> > machine-generated spam, it becomes useless.
> > See also
> >
> >
> https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/421831/temporary-policy-chatgpt-is-banned
> > https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33891538
> >
> >
> > The sequence of concatenations of Fibonacci
> > > numbers and squares in both orders (not allowing leading 0's) is
> > >
> > > 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 24, 29, 30, 31, 34, 39, 40, 41,
> > > 42,
> > > 43, 45, 48, 50, 51, 54, 59, 80, 81, 84, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 95, 98,
> 113,
> > > 116, 121, 125, 130, 131, 134, 136, 139, 149, 155, 160, 161, 162, 163,
> > 164,
> > > 165, 168, 181, 189, 210, 211, 214, 216, 219, 225, 236, 249, 250, 251,
> > 252,
> > > 253, 255, 258, ...
> > >
> > > which doesn't seem to be in OEIS, and I think I'll contribute it.
> >
> >
> > Why? Is there anything noteworthy about this sequence?
> > "Computer <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_says_no>said
> > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_says_no> submit it" is not
> > noteworthy. Computer says lots of things.
> >
> > I think it's particularly un-mathematically-interesting because
> > "concatenation" is nothing but an artifact of base-10 notation. If you
> > think there's something special about concatenating Xs and Ys in base 10,
> > why not also in base 8, or base 3, or base 37?  And why squares but not
> > cubes, Fibonacci numbers but not strings of 1s,...
> >
> > –Arthur
> >
> > --
> > Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
> >
>
>
> --
> Alonso del Arte
>
> --
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>