Talk:EKG sequence convergence: Difference between revisions

Line 6:

Hi Nigel. I will take another look at the task and convergence over the next few days. I would discourage people from adding examples until then. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 21:03, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

I had a look:

# The first Python solution is wrong - I'll either fix it or delete it. Thanks for finding that.

# The second Python solution does seem to be right. It gives different results than the first Python solution for EKG(9) and EKG(10). Its results for EKG(9) and EKG(10) match those of

[https://oeis.org/A169849 A169849] and [https://oeis.org/A169851 A169851], respectively.

Addressing your comments:

* ''I have modified the task to require EKG(9) and EKG(10)'' - You've certainly shown that there is a need.

* ''I think all the solutions will be wrong.'' - Not necessarily, they just need to cover the extra requirements. Their algorithms may be correct I mean.

* ''This divergence/convergence is illusionary''. It is real. The Python generator that uses gcd is easiest for me to reason about. What it generates next is solely down to the state help in names last and so_far. If they coincide between two generators then those generators could not then diverge.<br>

I've learnt something more. Thanks Nigel. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 21:34, 8 August 2018 (UTC)