![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"the nth term can always be determined by applying a fixed and finite set of rules to the preceding n−1 terms" -- really? I think it's that the n'th term depends on the output of an FSA given the digits of n in some fixed base, and that this is not the same thing. Zarboublian ( talk) 12:16, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Allouche and Shallitt page 1752 say that this is 2-automatic. Why are arguing about calling it "automatic base 2"? Zarboublian ( talk) 06:33, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
I have chosen to revise this article as part of a project for a course on automatic sequences. My goal is to make the article easier to read and understand by cleaning up the structure of the article and adding additional details. Please don't be alarmed if you see a large number of changes over the next little while. If you have any concerns, feel free to contact me.
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"the nth term can always be determined by applying a fixed and finite set of rules to the preceding n−1 terms" -- really? I think it's that the n'th term depends on the output of an FSA given the digits of n in some fixed base, and that this is not the same thing. Zarboublian ( talk) 12:16, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Allouche and Shallitt page 1752 say that this is 2-automatic. Why are arguing about calling it "automatic base 2"? Zarboublian ( talk) 06:33, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
I have chosen to revise this article as part of a project for a course on automatic sequences. My goal is to make the article easier to read and understand by cleaning up the structure of the article and adding additional details. Please don't be alarmed if you see a large number of changes over the next little while. If you have any concerns, feel free to contact me.