Typo in is_consecutive_sequence_of relationship

[ahwagner]

What is the SO term name and accession? This involves the SO relationship, is_consecutive_sequence_of.

Describe what you would like to change. The definition has a few typos and omissions from the source material, and the errors make the concept difficult to comprehend. One approach might be to precisely match the source definition:

R is_consecutive_sequence_of U if and only if every instance of R is equivalent to a collection of instances of U u1,u2,…, un such that no pair ux uy is overlapping, and for all ux, ux is adjacent_to ux-1 and ux+1, with the exception of the initial and terminal u1 and un (which may be identical).

Though preferably this could be enhanced using mathematical notation (emphasized) to clarify further:

R is_consecutive_sequence_of U iff every instance of R is equivalent to a collection of instances of U = {u1, u2, …, un} such that no pair (ux, uy) is overlapping, and for all ux ∈ U given 1 < x < n, ux is adjacent_to ux-1 and ux+1.

Relevant Publications Same as the current source publication.