A329405
Among the pairwise sums of any three consecutive terms there is no prime: lexicographically earliest such sequence of distinct positive integers.
Original entry on oeis.org
1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 14, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 18, 17, 16, 19, 20, 25, 24, 21, 27, 23, 22, 26, 28, 29, 34, 31, 32, 33, 30, 35, 39, 37, 38, 40, 36, 41, 44, 43, 42, 45, 46, 47, 48, 51, 54, 57, 58, 53, 52, 59, 56, 49, 50, 55, 60, 61, 62, 63, 66, 67, 68, 65, 64, 69, 71, 72, 70, 73, 74, 79, 76, 77, 78
Offset: 1
a(1) = 1 from minimality.
a(2) = 3 since 2 would produce 3 (a prime) by making 1 + 2.
a(3) = 5 since 2 or 4 would produce a prime (e.g., 3 + 4 = 7).
a(4) = 7 since 2, 4 or 6 would produce a prime (e.g., 5 + 6 = 11).
...
a(8) = 14 as 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 or 12 would produce a prime together with a(7) = 13 or a(6) = 11.
a(9) = 2 as neither 2 + 13 = 15 nor 2 + 14 = 16 is prime.
And so on.
Cf.
A329333 (3 consecutive terms, exactly 1 prime sum).
Cf.
A329406 ..
A329410 (exactly 1 prime sum using 4, ..., 10 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329411 ..
A329416 (exactly 2 prime sums using 3, ..., 10 consecutive terms).
-
a[1]=1;a[2]=3;a[n_]:=a[n]=(k=1;While[Or@@PrimeQ[Plus@@@Subsets[{a[n-1],a[n-2],++k},{2}]]||MemberQ[Array[a,n-1],k]];k);Array[a,100] (* Giorgos Kalogeropoulos, May 09 2021 *)
-
A329405(n, show=1, o=1, p=o, U=[])={for(n=o, n-1, show&&print1(p", "); U=setunion(U, [p]); while(#U>1&&U[1]==U[2]-1, U=U[^1]); for(k=U[1]+1, oo, setsearch(U, k) || isprime(o+k) || isprime(p+k) || [o=p, p=k, break])); p} \\ Optional args: show=0: don't print the list; o=0: start with a(0) = 0, i.e., compute A329450. See the wiki page for more general code returning a vector: S(n,0,3,1) = a(1..n).
A329411
Among the pairwise sums of any three consecutive terms there are exactly two prime sums: lexicographically earliest such sequence of distinct positive numbers.
Original entry on oeis.org
1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 6, 5, 8, 9, 10, 13, 16, 15, 14, 17, 12, 11, 18, 19, 22, 21, 20, 23, 24, 29, 30, 31, 28, 25, 33, 34, 26, 27, 32, 35, 36, 37, 42, 41, 38, 45, 44, 39, 40, 43, 46, 51, 50, 47, 53, 54, 48, 49, 52, 55, 57, 82, 56, 75, 62, 64, 87, 63, 76, 61, 66, 65, 71, 86, 60, 77, 67, 72, 59, 68, 69, 58, 70
Offset: 1
a(1) = 1 is the smallest possible choice; there's no restriction on the first term.
a(2) = 2 as 2 is the smallest available integer not leading to a contradiction. Note that as 1 + 2 = 3 we already have one prime sum (out of the required two) with the pair {1, 2}.
a(3) = 3 as 3 is the smallest available integer not leading to a contradiction. Since 2 + 3 = 5 we now have our two prime sums with the triplet {1, 2, 3}.
a(4) = 4 as 4 is the smallest available integer not leading to a contradiction. Since 3 + 4 = 7 we now have our two prime sums with the triplet {2, 3, 4}: they are 2 + 3 = 5 and 3 + 4 = 7.
a(5) = 7 because 5 or 6 would lead to a contradiction: indeed, both the triplets {3, 4, 5} and {3, 4, 6} will produce only one prime sum (instead of two). With a(5) = 7 we have the triplet {3, 4, 7} and the two prime sums we were looking for: 3 + 4 = 7 and 4 + 7 = 11.
And so on.
- Jean-Marc Falcoz, Table of n, a(n) for n = 1..10000
- Eric Angelini, Prime sums from neighbouring terms [Cached copy of html file, with permission]
- Eric Angelini, Prime sums from neighbouring terms [Cached copy of pdf file, with permission]
- M. F. Hasler, Prime sums from neighboring terms, OEIS wiki, Nov. 23, 2019
Cf.
A055265 (sum of two consecutive terms is always prime: differs from a(30) on).
Cf.
A329412 ..
A329416 (exactly 2 prime sums using 4, ..., 10 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A055266 (no prime sum among 2 consecutive terms),
A329405 (no prime among the pairwise sums of 3 consecutive terms).
-
a[1]=1;a[2]=2;a[n_]:=a[n]=(k=1;While[Length@Select[Plus@@@Subsets[{a[n-1],a[n-2],++k},{2}],PrimeQ]!=2||MemberQ[Array[a,n-1],k]];k);Array[a,100] (* Giorgos Kalogeropoulos, May 09 2021 *)
-
A329411(n,show=0,o=1,N=2,M=2,p=[],U,u=o)={for(n=o,n-1, show>0&& print1(o", "); show<0&& listput(L,o); U+=1<<(o-u); U>>=-u+u+=valuation(U+1,2); p=concat(if(#p>=M, p[^1], p), o); my(c=N-sum(i=2,#p, sum(j=1,i-1, isprime(p[i]+p[j])))); for(k=u,oo, bittest(U,k-u)|| min(c-#[0|p<-p, isprime(p+k)], #p>=M) ||[o=k,break]));show&&print([u]);o} \\ Optional args: show=1: print a(o..n-1), show=-1: append a(o..n-1) to the (global) list L, in both cases print [least unused number] at the end; o=0: start with a(o)=o; N, M: find N primes using M+1 consecutive terms. - M. F. Hasler, Nov 16 2019
A329416
Among the pairwise sums of any ten consecutive terms there are exactly two prime sums: lexicographically earliest such sequence of distinct positive numbers.
Original entry on oeis.org
1, 2, 3, 7, 13, 19, 23, 25, 31, 32, 17, 8, 26, 37, 43, 49, 14, 38, 55, 61, 11, 20, 35, 67, 73, 79, 57, 9, 5, 15, 21, 42, 27, 12, 33, 30, 39, 45, 47, 18, 48, 6, 51, 24, 63, 69, 72, 75, 16, 36, 54, 60, 22, 66, 10, 4, 40, 29, 28, 34, 44, 41, 46, 50, 52, 58, 64, 53, 70, 71, 59, 62, 76, 56, 82, 88, 94, 65, 100
Offset: 1
a(1) = 1 is the smallest possible choice, there's no restriction on the first term.
a(2) = 2 as 2 is the smallest available integer not leading to a contradiction. Note that as 1 + 2 = 3 we already have one prime sum (on the required two) with the 10-set {1,2,a(3),a(4),a(5),a(6),a(7),a(8),a(9),a(10)}.
a(3) = 3 as 3 is the smallest available integer not leading to a contradiction. Note that as 2 + 3 = 5 we now have the two prime sums required with the 10-set {1,2,a(3),a(4),a(5),a(6),a(7),a(8),a(9),a(10)}.
a(4) = 7 as a(4) = 4, 5 or 6 would lead to a contradiction: indeed, the 10-sets {1,2,3,4,a(5),a(6),a(7),a(8),a(9),a(10)}, {1,2,3,5,a(5),a(6),a(7),a(8),a(9),a(10)} and {1,2,3,6,a(5),a(6),a(7),a(8),a(9),a(10)} will produce more than the two required prime sums. With a(4) = 7 we have no contradiction as the 10-set {1,2,3,7,a(5),a(6),a(7),a(8),a(9),a(10)} has now two prime sums so far: 1 + 2 = 3 and 2 + 3 = 5.
a(5) = 13 as a(5) = 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11 or 12 would again lead to a contradiction (more than 2 prime sums with the 10-set); in combination with any other term before it, a(5) = 13 will produce only composite sums.
a(6) = 19 as 19 is the smallest available integer not leading to a contradiction: indeed, the 10-set {1,2,3,7,13,19,a(7),a(8),a(9),a(10)} shows two prime sums so far: 1 + 2 = 3 and 2 + 3 = 5.
a(7) = 23 as 23 is the smallest available integer not leading to a contradiction; indeed, the 10-set {1,2,3,7,13,19,23,a(8),a(9),a(10)} shows only two prime sums so far, which are 1 + 2 = 3 and 2 + 3 = 5.
a(8) = 25 as 25 is the smallest available integer not leading to a contradiction and producing two prime sums so far with the 10-set {1,2,3,7,13,19,23,25,a(9),a(10)}; etc.
Cf.
A329333 (3 consecutive terms, exactly 1 prime sum).
Cf.
A329405 (no prime among the pairwise sums of 3 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329406 ..
A329410 (exactly 1 prime sum using 4, ..., 10 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329411 ..
A329415 (exactly 2 prime sums using 3, ..., 7 consecutive terms).
See also "nonnegative" variants:
A329450 (0 primes using 3 terms),
A329452 (2 primes using 4 terms),
A329453 (2 primes using 5 terms),
A329454 (3 primes using 4 terms),
A329449 (4 primes using 4 terms),
A329455 (3 primes using 5 terms),
A329456 (4 primes using 5 terms).
-
A329416(n, show=0, o=1, N=2, M=9, p=[], U, u=o)={for(n=o, n-1, show&&print1(o", "); U+=1<<(o-u); U>>=-u+u+=valuation(U+1, 2); p=concat(if(#p>=M, p[^1], p), o); my(c=N-sum(i=2, #p, sum(j=1, i-1, isprime(p[i]+p[j])))); if(#pM. F. Hasler, Nov 15 2019
A329566
For all n >= 0, exactly six sums are prime among a(n+i) + a(n+j), 0 <= i < j < 6; lexicographically earliest such sequence of distinct nonnegative numbers.
Original entry on oeis.org
0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 24, 5, 7, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 18, 19, 16, 12, 28, 31, 17, 15, 14, 22, 26, 20, 21, 27, 23, 30, 32, 80, 41, 38, 51, 39, 62, 29, 35, 44, 34, 45, 54, 25, 49, 33, 64, 36, 37, 40, 46, 61, 47, 42, 43, 55, 66, 58, 65, 48, 72, 79, 52, 53, 59, 78, 50, 57, 60, 89, 71, 56, 68, 63, 74, 75, 76, 69, 82, 81, 67, 91, 88, 70, 100
Offset: 0
For n = 0, we consider pairwise sums of the first 6 terms a(0..5) = (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 24): We have (a(i) + a(j), 0 <= i < j < 6) = (1; 2, 3; 3, 4, 5; 4, 5, 6, 7; 24, 25, 26, 27, 28) among which there are 6 primes, counted with repetition. This justifies taking a(0..4) = (0, ..., 4), the smallest possible choices for these first 5 terms. Since no smaller a(5) between 5 and 23 has this property, this is the start of the lexicographically earliest nonnegative sequence with this property and no duplicate terms.
Then we find that a(6) = 5 is possible, also giving 6 prime sums for n = 1, so this is the correct continuation (modulo later confirmation that the sequence can be continued without contradiction given this choice).
Next we find that a(7) = 6 is not possible, it would give only 5 prime sums using the 6 consecutive terms (2, 3, 4, 24, 5, 6). However, a(7) = 7 is a valid continuation, and so on.
Cf.
A329425 (6 primes using 5 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329449 (4 primes using 4 consecutive terms),
A329456 (4 primes using 5 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329454 (3 primes using 4 consecutive terms),
A329455 (3 primes using 5 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329411 (2 primes using 3 consecutive terms),
A329452 (2 primes using 4 consecutive terms),
A329453 (2 primes using 5 consecutive terms).
-
A329566(n,show=0,o=0,N=6,M=5,p=[],U,u=o)={for(n=o,n-1, if(show>0,print1(o", "), show<0,listput(L,o)); U+=1<<(o-u); U>>=-u+u+=valuation(U+1,2); p=concat(if(#p>=M,p[^1],p),o); my(c=N-sum(i=2,#p, sum(j=1,i-1, isprime(p[i]+p[j]))));if(#p
A329410
Among the pairwise sums of any ten consecutive terms there is exactly one prime sum: lexicographically earliest such sequence of distinct positive numbers.
Original entry on oeis.org
1, 2, 7, 8, 13, 14, 19, 20, 25, 26, 108, 32, 37, 38, 44, 50, 10, 40, 12, 18, 28, 48, 105, 6, 4, 16, 24, 30, 36, 42, 54, 56, 9, 46, 22, 60, 66, 68, 72, 76, 78, 82, 93, 34, 52, 62, 43, 83, 92, 102, 23, 53, 3, 29, 31, 27, 33, 41, 15, 88, 5, 11, 17, 35, 45, 47, 55, 57, 21, 64, 51, 59, 61, 65, 39, 69, 71, 77, 79, 136, 49, 67, 63
Offset: 1
a(1) = 1 by minimality.
a(2) = 2 as 2 is the smallest available integer not leading to a contradiction. Note that as 1 + 2 = 3 we have already the prime sum we need.
a(3) = 7 as a(3) = 3, 4, 5 or 6 would produce at least one prime sum too many.
a(4) = 8 as a(4) = 3, 4, 5 or 6 would again produce at least one prime sum too many.
a(5) = 13 as a(5) = 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11 or 12 would also produce at least one prime sum too many.
a(6) = 14 as a(6) = 14 doesn't produce an extra prime sum - only composite sums.
a(7) = 19 as a(7) = 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17 or 18 would produce at least a prime sum too many.
a(8) = 20 as a(8) = 20 doesn't produce an extra prime sum - only composite sums.
a(9) = 25 as a(9) = 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23 or 24 would produce at least a prime sum too many.
a(10) = 26 as(10) = 26 doesn't produce an extra prime sum - only composite sums.
a(11) = 108 is the smallest available integer that produces the single prime sum we need among the last 10 integers {2,7,8,13,14,19,20,25,26,108}, which is 127 = 108 + 19.
And so on.
Cf.
A329333 (3 consecutive terms, exactly 1 prime sum).
Cf.
A329405 (no prime among the pairwise sums of 3 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329406 ..
A329409 (exactly 1 prime sum using 4, ..., 7 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329411 ..
A329416 (exactly 2 prime sums using 3, ..., 10 consecutive terms).
A329563
For all n >= 1, exactly five sums are prime among a(n+i) + a(n+j), 0 <= i < j < 5; lexicographically earliest such sequence of distinct positive numbers.
Original entry on oeis.org
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 14, 6, 23, 17, 7, 12, 24, 10, 13, 19, 16, 18, 25, 22, 15, 28, 21, 26, 32, 75, 20, 11, 27, 56, 30, 41, 53, 29, 38, 60, 44, 35, 113, 36, 31, 48, 61, 37, 42, 46, 33, 34, 55, 39, 40, 49, 58, 45, 43, 52, 51, 106, 57, 62, 50, 87, 47, 54, 59, 80, 66, 83, 68
Offset: 1
For n = 1, we consider pairwise sums among the first 5 terms chosen as small as possible, a(1..5) = (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). We see that we have indeed 5 primes among the sums 1+2, 1+3, 1+4, 1+5, 2+3, 2+4, 2+5, 3+4, 3+5, 4+5.
Then, to get a(6), consider first the pairwise sums among terms a(2..5), (2+3, 2+4, 2+5; 3+4, 3+5; 4+5), among which there are 3 primes, counted with multiplicity (i.e., the prime 7 is there two times). So the new term a(6) must give exactly two more prime sums with the terms a(2..5). We find that 6 or 7 would give just one more (5+6 resp. 4+7), but a(6) = 8 gives exactly two more, 3+8 and 5+8.
Cf.
A329425 (6 primes using 5 consecutive terms),
A329566 (6 primes using 6 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329449 (4 primes using 4 consecutive terms),
A329456 (4 primes using 5 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329454 (3 primes using 4 consecutive terms),
A329455 (3 primes using 5 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329411 (2 primes using 3 consecutive terms),
A329452 (2 primes using 4 consecutive terms),
A329453 (2 primes using 5 consecutive terms).
-
{A329563(n,show=1,o=1,N=5,M=4,p=[],u=o,U)=for(n=o,n-1, show>0&& print1(o","); show<0&& listput(L,o); U+=1<<(o-u); U>>=-u+u+=valuation(U+1,2); p=concat(if(#p>=M,p[^1],p),o); my(c=N-sum(i=2,#p, sum(j=1,i-1, isprime(p[i]+p[j])))); if(#p
A329564
For all n >= 0, exactly five sums are prime among a(n+i) + a(n+j), 0 <= i < j < 5; lexicographically earliest such sequence of distinct nonnegative numbers.
Original entry on oeis.org
0, 1, 2, 3, 6, 5, 8, 11, 7, 12, 29, 18, 19, 4, 13, 9, 22, 10, 21, 14, 57, 16, 15, 17, 26, 27, 20, 23, 33, 34, 38, 45, 25, 28, 51, 46, 31, 43, 58, 30, 24, 37, 49, 35, 36, 102, 47, 42, 55, 32, 41, 48, 65, 39, 62, 44, 40, 63, 69, 50, 68, 59, 80, 71, 54, 77, 60, 53, 56, 74, 75
Offset: 0
For n = 0, we consider pairwise sums among the first 5 terms a(0..4), among which we must have 5 primes. To get a(4), consider first a(0..3) = (0, 1, 2, 3) and the pairwise sums (a(i) + a(j), 0 <= i < j <= 3) = (1; 2, 3; 3, 4, 5) among which there are 4 primes, counted with multiplicity (i.e., the prime 3 is there two times). So the additional term a(4) must give exactly one more prime sum with all of a(0..3). We find that 4 or 5 would give two more primes, but a(4) = 6 gives exactly one more, 1 + 6 = 7.
Now, for n = 1 we forget the initial 0 and consider the pairwise sums of the remaining terms {1, 2, 3, 6}. There are 3 prime sums, so the next term must give two more. The term 4 would give two more (1+4 and 3+4) primes, but thereafter we would have {2, 3, 6, 4} with only 2 prime sums and impossibility to add one term to get three more prime sums: 2+x, 6+x and 4+x can't be all prime for x > 1.
Therefore 4 isn't the next term, and we try a(5) = 5 which indeed gives the required number of primes, and also allows us to continue.
Cf.
A329425 (6 primes using 5 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A055266 &
A253074 (0 primes using 2 terms),
A329405 &
A329450 (0 primes using 3 terms),
A055265 &
A128280 (1 prime using 2 terms),
A329333,
A329406 -
A329410 (1 prime using 3, ..., 10 terms),
A329411 -
A329416 and
A329452,
A329453 (2 primes using 3, ..., 10 terms),
A329454 &
A329455 (3 primes using 4 resp. 5 terms),
A329449 &
A329456 (4 primes using 4 resp. 5 terms),
A329568 &
A329569 (9 primes using 6 terms),
A329572 &
A329573 (12 primes using 7 terms),
A329563 -
A329581: other variants.
-
{A329564(n,show=1,o=0,N=5,M=4,X=[[4,4]],p=[],u,U)=for(n=o,n-1, show>0&& print1(o","); show<0&& listput(L,o); U+=1<<(o-u); U>>=-u+u+=valuation(U+1,2); p=concat(if(#p>=M,p[^1],p),o); my(c=N-sum(i=2,#p, sum(j=1,i-1, isprime(p[i]+p[j])))); if(#p
A329576
For all n >= 1, exactly seven sums are prime among a(n+i) + a(n+j), 0 <= i < j < 6; lexicographically earliest such sequence of distinct positive numbers.
Original entry on oeis.org
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 11, 26, 15, 9, 14, 32, 17, 20, 21, 27, 10, 16, 19, 7, 12, 13, 24, 6, 23, 35, 25, 37, 18, 36, 22, 31, 61, 28, 30, 39, 40, 43, 33, 64, 38, 45, 34, 29, 63, 50, 44, 53, 42, 59, 47, 54, 48, 41, 90, 49, 55, 52, 108, 58, 46, 51, 121, 73, 78, 76, 100, 79, 81, 151, 60, 67, 112, 70, 69
Offset: 1
For n = 1, we must forbid the greedy choice for a(6) which would be 6, which leads to a dead end: there is no possibility to find a subsequent term that would give 7 prime sums together with {2, 3, 4, 5, 6}. If we take the next larger possibility, a(6) = 8, then it works for the next and all subsequent terms.
Cf.
A329425 (6 primes using 5 consecutive terms),
A329566 (6 primes using 6 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329449 (4 primes using 4 consecutive terms),
A329456 (4 primes using 5 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329454 (3 primes using 4 consecutive terms),
A329455 (3 primes using 5 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329411 (2 primes using 3 consecutive terms),
A329452 (2 primes using 4 consecutive terms),
A329453 (2 primes using 5 consecutive terms).
-
{A329576(n,show=1,o=1,N=7,M=5,X=[[6,6]],p=[],u=o,U)=for(n=o+1,n, show>0&& print1(o","); show<0&& listput(L,o); U+=1<<(o-u); U>>=-u+u+=valuation(U+1,2); p=concat(if(#p>=M,p[^1],p),o); my(c=N-sum(i=2,#p, sum(j=1,i-1, isprime(p[i]+p[j])))); if(#p
A329407
Among the pairwise sums of any five consecutive terms there is exactly one prime sum; lexicographically earliest such sequence of distinct positive numbers.
Original entry on oeis.org
1, 2, 7, 8, 13, 12, 14, 4, 20, 21, 6, 18, 15, 10, 3, 17, 5, 11, 16, 25, 9, 19, 23, 30, 26, 32, 22, 33, 24, 27, 28, 36, 29, 34, 35, 40, 31, 41, 37, 44, 38, 43, 39, 42, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 68, 51, 57, 54, 53, 61, 58, 62, 50, 52, 59, 56, 60, 55, 67, 63, 65, 66, 69, 75, 77, 64, 71, 70, 72, 73, 76, 74, 80
Offset: 1
a(1) = 1 by minimality.
a(2) = 2 as 2 is the smallest available integer not leading to a contradiction. Note that as 1 + 2 = 3 we already have our prime sum.
a(3) = 7 as a(3) = 3, 4, 5 or 6 would produce at least one prime sum too many.
a(4) = 8 as a(4) = 3, 4, 5 or 6 would again produce at least one prime sum too many.
a(5) = 13 as a(5) = 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11 or 12 would also produce at least one prime sum too many.
a(6) = 12 and we have the single prime sum we need among the last 5 integers {2,7,8,13,12}, which is 19 = 12 + 7.
And so on.
Cf.
A329333 (3 consecutive terms, exactly 1 prime sum).
Cf.
A329405: no prime among the pairwise sums of 3 consecutive terms.
Cf.
A329406 ..
A329410: exactly 1 prime sum using 4, ..., 10 consecutive terms.
Cf.
A329411 ..
A329416: exactly 2 prime sums using 3, ..., 10 consecutive terms.
A329565
For all n >= 0, exactly five sums are prime among a(n+i) + a(n+j), 0 <= i < j < 6; lexicographically earliest such sequence of distinct nonnegative numbers.
Original entry on oeis.org
0, 1, 2, 3, 6, 24, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 7, 13, 12, 17, 16, 14, 15, 19, 22, 18, 21, 20, 26, 23, 25, 27, 33, 34, 28, 29, 32, 38, 39, 30, 31, 41, 40, 36, 35, 42, 61, 44, 43, 66, 37, 52, 45, 47, 46, 51, 50, 57, 48, 49, 53, 55, 56, 59, 54, 58, 72, 95, 62, 65, 67, 63, 84, 64, 60, 68, 89, 71, 69, 73, 80, 78, 70, 79, 87, 76, 75, 74, 88, 77, 81, 82, 189, 85
Offset: 0
For n = 0, we consider pairwise sums of the first 6 terms a(0..5) = (0, 1, 2, 3, 6, 24): We have (a(i) + a(j), 0 <= i < j < 6) = (1; 2, 3; 3, 4, 5; 6, 7, 8, 9; 24, 25, 26, 27, 30) among which there are 5 primes, counted with repetition. If one tries to take a(4) equal to 4 or 5, this yields already 6 primes among the pairwise sums of the first 5 terms, so the smallest possible choice is a(4) = 6, and thereafter any a(5) less than 24 would again yield too many prime sums. So (0, 1, 2, 3, 6, 24) is indeed the start of the lexicographically earliest nonnegative sequence with the required properties.
Then one finds that a(6) = 4 is possible, giving also 6 prime sums for n = 1, so this is the correct continuation (modulo later confirmation that the sequence can be continued without contradiction given this choice).
Next one finds that a(7) = 5 is also possible, and so on.
Cf.
A329425 (6 primes using 5 consecutive terms),
A329566 (6 primes using 6 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329449 (4 primes using 4 consecutive terms),
A329456 (4 primes using 5 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329454 (3 primes using 4 consecutive terms),
A329455 (3 primes using 5 consecutive terms).
Cf.
A329411 (2 primes using 3 consecutive terms),
A329452 (2 primes using 4 consecutive terms),
A329453 (2 primes using 5 consecutive terms).
-
{A329565(n,show=0,o=0,N=5/*#primes*/,M=5,p=[],U,u=o)=for(n=o,n-1, if(show>0,print1(o", "), show<0,listput(L,o)); U+=1<<(o-u); U>>=-u+u+=valuation(U+1,2); p=concat(if(#p>=M,p[^1],p),o); my(c=N-sum(i=2,#p, sum(j=1,i-1, isprime(p[i]+p[j]))));if(#p
Showing 1-10 of 11 results.
Comments