The ratio of one term to the last
growth-ratio is one function. Everything below came out of it during this
build, at arguments taken from the essays rather than invented for this page — so a figure
here is the same figure a reader meets in an essay, and when the generator changes, this
page changes with it.
At its defaults
upTo: 9
upTo: 9
upTo: 7
What it checked while it drew
Collected by running this generator with a listener on the assertions, not written here. The count is how many separate times this build put that claim to the test.
- the stamp-folding counts are computed to n = 9 within the build, so the plotted terms are this repository's own arithmetic ×5
- every stamp-folding count computed here agrees with Lunnon's published value — an independent enumeration against a fifty-year-old table ×1
- the cost curve is measured over strips the enumerator can exhaust, so each point is a complete search rather than a truncated one ×1
- the sequence carries enough terms for successive ratios to mean something ×1
Where it is called
Changing this generator changes every figure on this list, which is what makes the list worth publishing rather than keeping in a check script.
The answer is bigger than the question
A twelve-square strip of stamps is twelve numbers of input and 146,376 objects of output. No algorithm writes that faster than it can be written, so 'efficient' has to be measured against the answer rather than against the question — and in folding that is the normal case.
Where the exponent comes from
The number of ways a strip of stamps folds grows exponentially, and the base of the exponential is a number nobody has proved exists. The ratio of one term to the last climbs past three and is still climbing where the computation stops — which is the only structural handle anybody has on the sequence.
Every generator · The what it costs to know field · The patterns a reader can fold