[seqfan] Re: Reproducing A064690 (sign changes of a rational fraction iteration)

[Lucas Brown]

Regardless of the accuracy of the terms, the title should be edited so that
"x(1)=1; sequences" becomes "x(0)=1; sequence".

On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 8:25 PM Sean A. Irvine <sairvin at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm finding reproducing A064690 surprisingly difficult despite its simple
> definition:
>
> https://oeis.org/A064690
>
> It is my suspicion that the later terms were computed with insufficient
> precision.
>
> Computing it exactly using rational arithmetic seems too slow to reach the
> values listed.  Instead, I computed (using constructible real arithmetic --
> which in theory should also be correct): 2, 4, 7, 11, 13, 22, 23, 332, 560,
> 565, 566, 568, 616, 618, 1161, 1163, 1167 but this does not match existing
> terms beyond 568.
>
> Could someone please make an attempt to verify (or come up with a better
> way to compute this sequence) ?
>
> Sean.
>
> --
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>