Talk:Optimal ET sequence

Is "Val list" the best name for this thing?

I note that this isn't really a list of maps ("vals"), like ⟨12 19 28], but actually a list of ETs given in wart notation. So I could see this being called an "ET list", with the other distinguishing facts left opaque (those being that they are [a] only ETs whose maps are uniform maps ("GPVs") and [b] where each subsequent map improves upon TE error). Unless some people don't consider e.g. 17p to be a different ET from 17c, but only different maps for the same ET, but then that's getting pretty philosophical I think. Or the title could attempt to convey both those facts, such as "Error-decreasing GPV sequence" (though of course I would prefer my own term "uniform map", I understand I should defer to the convention here.) --Cmloegcmluin (talk) 17:47, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

You're right. Val list isn't the best name for this thing. Imo list should be avoided and sequence is a good substitute. ET sequence is a name I reckon very proper. I'm afraid further constraints like error-decreasing or GPV are less essential, but are somewhat heuristic choices that help to shape a neat sequence. The error-decreasing constraint is good at limiting the length of the sequence. It's possible to make another sequence that's quite similar but different – the MOS numbers for the optimal tuning. The GPV constraint is handy in that it makes the sequence terminate. FloraC (talk) 19:14, 18 November 2021 (UTC)