| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ravel
Joined: 21 Apr 2006
Posts: 536
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 03, 2008 6:27 pm Post subject: Sue de Coq training |
 |
|
This current game pattern not only has many jellyfish puzzles, but also Sue de Coq's. I seldom look for them (and only find easy ones), but here it is highly recommended. Some examples for Sue de Coq's with a bivalue cell:
| Code: |
. . 1 . . . 2 . .
. 3 . 4 . 2 . 5 .
6 . . . . . . . 3
. 1 . 7 . 6 . 4 .
. . . . . . . . .
. 6 . 8 . 4 . 9 .
7 . . . . . . . 5
. 4 . 3 . 7 . 8 .
. . 8 . . . 6 . . m_b_metcalf
+-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
| 4589 5789 1 | 569 356789 3589 | 2 @67 489-67 |
|#89 3 7-9 | 4 167-89 2 |@17+89 5 @167+89 |
| 6 25789 24579 | 159 15789 1589 | 1489-7 @17 3 |
+-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
| 23589 1 2359 | 7 2359 6 | 358 4 28 |
| 234589 25789 234579 | 1259 12359 1359 | 13578 12367 12678 |
| 235 6 2357 | 8 1235 4 | 1357 9 127 |
+-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
| 7 29 2369 | 1269 124689 189 | 1349 123 5 |
| 1259 4 2569 | 3 12569 7 | 19 8 129 |
| 12359 259 8 | 1259 12459 159 | 6 1237 12479 |
+-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+ |
If you split r2c79 into the 167 and 89 parts, its obvious, that one of the cells must be 8 or 9 - otherwise there are only 3 numbers 167 left for the 4 @-cells. And not both can be 8 and 9, so 167 are bound to the @-cells in the box.
So 89 can be eliminated from the rest of row 2 and 167 from the rest of box 3.
| Code: | . . 1 | . . . | 2 . .
. 3 . | 4 . 5 | . 6 .
5 . . | . . . | . . 7
-------+-------+-------
. 6 . | 5 . 4 | . 7 .
. . . | . . . | . . .
. 7 . | 8 . 9 | . 2 .
-------+-------+-------
3 . . | . . . | . . 9
. 9 . | 6 . 1 | . 4 .
. . 8 | . . . | 5 . . JPF
+-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
| 46789 48 1 | 379 36789 3678 | 2 3589 3458 |
| 2789 3 279 | 4 12789 5 | 189 6 18 |
| 5 248 2469 | 1239 123689 2368 | 13489 1389 7 |
+-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
| 1289 6 239 | 5 123 4 | 1389 7 138 |
| 12489 12458 23459 | 1237 12367 2367 | 134689 13589 134568 |
| 14 7 345 | 8 136 9 | 1346 2 13456 |
+-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
| 3 1245 24567 | 27 24578 278 | 1678 18 9 |
|#27 9 257 | 6 23578 1 | 378 4 238 |
| 12467 124 8 | 2379 23479 237 | 5 13 1236 |
+-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+ |
A very similar Sue de Coq here with the 27 in r8c1, solves it with "normal" advanced techniques.
| Code: | . . 1 . . . 9 . .
. 2 . 1 . 3 . 4 .
4 . . . . . . . 7
. 8 . 7 . 1 . 5 .
. . . . . . . . .
. 3 . 2 . 9 . 7 .
8 . . . . . . . 1
. 6 . 5 . 2 . 9 .
. . 7 . . . 3 . . gsf |
After the Sue de Coq, later i needed a transported generalized M-wing.
| Code: | . . 1 . . . 2 . .
. 3 . 2 . 4 . 5 .
6 . . . . . . . 4
. 6 . 7 . 3 . 8 .
. . . . . . . . .
. 8 . 1 . 2 . 3 .
9 . . . . . . . 5
. 1 . 3 . 5 . 2 .
. . 7 . . . 8 . . m_b_metcalf |
Sue de Coq, jellyfish, finned x-wing bring some progress - but still not finished yet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Asellus
Joined: 05 Jun 2007
Posts: 865
Location: Sonoma County, CA, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 03, 2008 9:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Sud de Coq in that last puzzle is very interesting and powerful. I don't believe I've encountered one quite like it before.
Here is my solution path:
[1] Sue de Coq
[2] 4 X-Wing c48
[3] 9 Jellyfish r2468
[4] 6 Finned X-Wing r19
Which brings us here:
| Code: | +----------+------------------+-----------------+
| 4 9 1 | 5 3 @67 | 2 67 8 |
| 7 3 8 | 2 #19-6 4 |c169 5 c169 |
| 6 2 5 | 89 178 1789 | 3 179 4 |
+----------+------------------+-----------------+
| 1 6 49 | 7 459 3 | 459 8 2 |
| 3 7 2 | 4689 568 689 | 156 1469 16 |
| 5 8 49 | 1 469 2 | 4679 3 679 |
+----------+------------------+-----------------+
| 9 4 3 |a68 2 @17f8 | 167 167 5 |
| 8 1 6 | 3 479 5 | 479 2 79 |
| 2 5 7 | 469 @16 169 | 8 b1469 3 |
+----------+------------------+-----------------+ |
[5] Finned XY-Wing
The potential XY-Wing is marked @, with Fin <8> marked "f" in r7c6. If the Fin is true, r7c4 is <6>, which the victim "#" can see via the ERs in boxes 9 and 3 ("transport path" marked "b" and "c").
This leads to:
| Code: | +----------+-------------------+-----------------+
| 4 9 1 | 5 3 6 | 2 7 8 |
| 7 3 8 | 2 d@19 4 | 169 5 169 |
| 6 2 5 |c89 178 #789-1 | 3 19 4 |
+----------+-------------------+-----------------+
| 1 6 49 | 7 459 3 | 459 8 2 |
| 3 7 2 | 4689 568 @89 | 156 1469 16 |
| 5 8 49 | 1 469 2 | 4679 3 679 |
+----------+-------------------+-----------------+
| 9 4 3 |b68 2 @18f7 |a167 a16 5 |
| 8 1 6 | 3 479 5 | 479 2 79 |
| 2 5 7 | 469 #6-1 19 | 8 1469 3 |
+----------+-------------------+-----------------+ |
[6] Finned XY-Wing
Again marked @ with Fin <7> in r7c6. The Fin creates an ALS chain marked "abcd" resulting in r2c5=1 if the Fin is true. Since this is one of the XY-Wing pincers, its victims, #, are eliminated. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ravel
Joined: 21 Apr 2006
Posts: 536
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 04, 2008 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In the second finned xy-wing, isn't r9c6 the second pincer (making it an "almost triple") and the fin giving a third one in r2c5 ?
Nice solution anyway.
Here is another example with an even easier Sue de Coq - only 3 cells (with 2 other numbers) in the box.
| Code: | +-------+-------+-------+
| 1 . . | . . . | . . 2 |
| . 2 . | . 3 . | . 4 . |
| . . 5 | 2 . 6 | 7 . . |
+-------+-------+-------+
| . . 4 | 3 . 8 | 9 . . |
| . . . | . 6 . | . . . |
| . . 6 | 9 . 1 | 2 . . |
+-------+-------+-------+
| . . 1 | 4 . 3 | 6 . . |
| . 5 . | . 9 . | . 3 . |
| 4 . . | . . . | . . 8 |
+-------+-------+-------+ Mauricio
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Asellus
Joined: 05 Jun 2007
Posts: 865
Location: Sonoma County, CA, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 04, 2008 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ravel wrote: | | In the second finned xy-wing, isn't r9c6 the second pincer (making it an "almost triple") and the fin giving a third one in r2c5 ? |
Oops! I'm sure I wasn't thinking of the c6 ALS as the "almost XY Wing," so can't account for it. 
However, as you note, it is still valid (lucky for me!) since it is an ALS chain:
ALS:r579c6[(1)r79c6=(7)r7c6] - ALS[(7)r7c7=(6)r7c78] - (6=8)r7c4 - (8=9)r3c4 - (9=1)r2c5
I like how the Sue de Coq in this puzzle induced a conjugate pair of <8>s in r2c13, perpendicular to the column (c2) containing the ALS outside of box 1. That is the situation I don't recall ever seeing before in a Sue de Coq. I've encountered several where the conjugate pair (or locked candidates) is induced parallel to the "external" ALS, however.
[What happened to all the other posts on this thread?]
[Edit to add "(or locked candidates)" since that's what is actually being induced by a Sue de Coq.]
Last edited by Asellus on Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:13 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Marty R.
Joined: 12 Feb 2006
Posts: 5770
Location: Rochester, NY, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | [What happened to all the other posts on this thread?] |
??? I didn't touch anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
daj95376
Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 3854
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 04, 2008 9:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Asellus wrote: | [What happened to all the other posts on this thread?]
|
If you are referring to my posts, I deleted them to reconsider what I wanted to say.
I don't understand how a Sue de Coq works, but I've run several puzzles through my solver and observed that many had short continuous loops confined to two boxes and have some overlapping eliminations. Upon closer examination, I noticed a secondary relationship.
Here is ravel's first PM. Notice [r2c13]=789 and [r2c3]=3. An ALS (?) pair of bivalue cells in a mini-unit, along with a solved cell, is easy to spot and easy to test.
| Code: | ravel's PM
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 4589 5789 1 | 569 356789 3589 | 2 67 46789 |
| 89 3 79 | 4 16789 2 | 1789 5 16789 |
| 6 25789 24579 | 159 15789 1589 | 14789 17 3 |
|--------------------------+--------------------------+--------------------------|
| 23589 1 2359 | 7 2359 6 | 358 4 28 |
| 234589 25789 234579 | 1259 12359 1359 | 13578 12367 12678 |
| 235 6 2357 | 8 1235 4 | 1357 9 127 |
|--------------------------+--------------------------+--------------------------|
| 7 29 2369 | 1269 124689 189 | 1349 123 5 |
| 1259 4 2569 | 3 12569 7 | 19 8 129 |
| 12359 259 8 | 1259 12459 159 | 6 1237 12479 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|
If we eliminate the common candidate and set [r2c1]=8 and [r2c3]=7, then we get an immediate contradiction in [c2]. An immediate contradiction in an intersecting row/column -- or the mini-unit box -- is important to make this approach appealing to hand solvers.
| Code: | After making incorrect assignments
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------------*
| 459 59 1 | 569 356789 3589 | 2 67 46789 |
| 8 3 7 | 4 169 2 | 19 5 169 |
| 6 259 2459 | 159 15789 1589 | 14789 17 3 |
|-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------|
| 2359 1 2359 | 7 2359 6 | 358 4 28 |
| 23459 259+78 23459 | 1259 12359 1359 | 13578 12367 12678 |
| 235 6 235 | 8 1235 4 | 1357 9 127 |
|-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------|
| 7 29 2369 | 1269 124689 189 | 1349 123 5 |
| 1259 4 2569 | 3 12569 7 | 19 8 129 |
| 12359 259 8 | 1259 12459 159 | 6 1237 12479 |
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------------*
|
This means that one of [r2c1]=9 or [r2c3]=9 must be true, and results in the following eliminations.
| Code: | eliminations in (9)
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 458-9 578-9 1 | 569 356789 3589 | 2 67 46789 |
| 89 3 79 | 4 1678-9 2 | 178-9 5 1678-9 |
| 6 2578-9 2457-9 | 159 15789 1589 | 14789 17 3 |
|--------------------------+--------------------------+--------------------------|
| 23589 1 2359 | 7 2359 6 | 358 4 28 |
| 234589 25789 234579 | 1259 12359 1359 | 13578 12367 12678 |
| 235 6 2357 | 8 1235 4 | 1357 9 127 |
|--------------------------+--------------------------+--------------------------|
| 7 29 2369 | 1269 124689 189 | 1349 123 5 |
| 1259 4 2569 | 3 12569 7 | 19 8 129 |
| 12359 259 8 | 1259 12459 159 | 6 1237 12479 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|
Note: This is only an observation of a relationship that occurs in some Sue de Coq puzzles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ravel
Joined: 21 Apr 2006
Posts: 536
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 04, 2008 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Marty R. wrote: | | I didn't touch anything. |
Oh, they always say it ! Suddenly it (the car, the PC, the elevator, the TV, the parachute) did not work any more. I didn't touch anything. How unbelievable 
But luckily you are rehabilitated by Danny's interesting post. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Marty R.
Joined: 12 Feb 2006
Posts: 5770
Location: Rochester, NY, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 04, 2008 10:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | But luckily you are rehabilitated by Danny's interesting post. |
VINDICATION IS SWEET!!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
storm_norm
Joined: 18 Oct 2007
Posts: 1741
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 1:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Code: | +-------+-------+-------+
| 1 . . | . . . | . . 2 |
| . 2 . | . 3 . | . 4 . |
| . . 5 | 2 . 6 | 7 . . |
+-------+-------+-------+
| . . 4 | 3 . 8 | 9 . . |
| . . . | . 6 . | . . . |
| . . 6 | 9 . 1 | 2 . . |
+-------+-------+-------+
| . . 1 | 4 . 3 | 6 . . |
| . 5 . | . 9 . | . 3 . |
| 4 . . | . . . | . . 8 |
+-------+-------+-------+ Mauricio |
| Code: | .------------------------.------------------------.------------------------.
| 1 346789 3789 | 578 4578 4579 | 358 5689 2 |
| 6789 2 789 | 1578 3 579 | 158 4 1569 |
| 389 3489 5 | 2 148 6 | 7 189 139 |
:------------------------+------------------------+------------------------:
| 257 17 4 | 3 257 8 | 9 1567 1567 |
| 235789 13789 23789 | 57 6 2457 | 13458 1578 13457 |
| 3578 378 6 | 9 457 1 | 2 578 3457 |
:------------------------+------------------------+------------------------:
| 2789 789 1 | 4 2578 3 | 6 2579 579 |
| 2678 5 278 | 1678 9 27 | 14 3 147 |
| 4 3679 2379 | 1567 1257 257 | 15 12579 8 |
'------------------------'------------------------'------------------------' |
ignoring the su de coq...
1. loop... (8)r8c4 = (8-5)r7c5 = (5)r9c456 - (5=1)r9c7 - (1)r9c45 = (1)r8c4; means that r7c5 <> 2,7
2. (1=5)r9c7 - (5)r9c456 = (5-8)r7c5 = (8-6)r8c4 = (6)r9c4; r9c4 <> 1
3. (1=5)r9c7 - (5)r9c456 = (5-8)r7c5 = (8-1)r8c4 = (1)r2c4; r2c7 <> 1
4. (6)r9c4 = (6-8)r8c4 = (8-5)r7c5 = (5)r9c456 - (5=1)r9c7 - (1)r9c5 = (1)r8c4; r8c4 <> 6 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
daj95376
Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 3854
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 1:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| storm_norm wrote: | ignoring the su de coq...
1. loop... (8)r8c4 = (8-5)r7c5 = (5)r9c456 - (5=1)r9c7 - (1)r9c45 = (1)r8c4; means that r7c5 <> 2,7
|
Norm, this is a continuous loop and has more eliminations than you indicated.
| Code: | [r7c5]<>27, [r8c4]<>67, [r9c8]<>15
|
How do these eliminations compare to the Sue de Coq you were trying to avoid?
[Edit: corrected a typo in the cells listed for eliminations.]
Last edited by daj95376 on Wed Nov 05, 2008 11:02 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
storm_norm
Joined: 18 Oct 2007
Posts: 1741
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 2:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ok, yeah, you are right. it does have more eliminations |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ravel
Joined: 21 Apr 2006
Posts: 536
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| daj95376 wrote: | | How do these eliminations compare to the Sue de Coq you were trying to avoid? |
Very interesting loop near the Sue de Coq cells, where 2 cells are revisited.
However the Sue de Coq eliminations are more effective here.
And after this training its much easier to find 
I dare say now , that such 4/5-cell Sue de Coq's with a bivalue cell in the row/column aren't much harder to spot than an empty rectangle.
| Code: | .------------------------.------------------------.------------------------.
| 1 346789 3789 | 578 4578 4579 | 358 5689 2 |
| 6789 2 789 | 1578 3 579 | 158 4 1569 |
| 389 3489 5 | 2 148 6 | 7 189 139 |
:------------------------+------------------------+------------------------:
| 257 17 4 | 3 257 8 | 9 1567 1567 |
| 235789 13789 23789 | 57 6 2457 | 13458 1578 13457 |
| 3578 378 6 | 9 457 1 | 2 578 3457 |
:------------------------+------------------------+------------------------:
| 2789 789 1 | 4 58-27 3 | 6 2579 579 |
| 2678 5 278 | 168-7 9 @27 | 14 3 147 |
| 4 3679 2379 | 6-157 @15+27 @5+27 |#15 279-15 8 |
'------------------------'------------------------'------------------------' |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
daj95376
Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 3854
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ravel wrote: | | However the Sue de Coq eliminations are more effective here. |
Effective is a rather strong term! The SdC only performs more initial eliminations than Norm's continuous loop. In this puzzle, both the SdC and the continuous loop reduce the puzzle to the same grid using Singles.
| Code: | *-----------------------------------------------------------------------------*
| 1 6 3789 | 578 4578 4579 | 358 589 2 |
| 789 2 789 | 1578 3 579 | 158 4 6 |
| 389 4 5 | 2 18 6 | 7 189 139 |
|-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------|
| 257 17 4 | 3 257 8 | 9 6 157 |
| 235789 13789 23789 | 57 6 2457 | 13458 1578 13457 |
| 3578 378 6 | 9 457 1 | 2 578 3457 |
|-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------|
| 2789 789 1 | 4 58 3 | 6 2579 579 |
| 6 5 278 | 18 9 27 | 14 3 147 |
| 4 379 2379 | 6 1257 257 | 15 279 8 |
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------------*
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ravel
Joined: 21 Apr 2006
Posts: 536
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 7:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| daj95376 wrote: | | Effective is a rather strong term! The SdC only performs more initial eliminations than Norm's continuous loop. In this puzzle, both the SdC and the continuous loop reduce the puzzle to the same grid using Singles |
Ah, thats right. I did not follow the puzzle with all eliminations of the loop, only looked at Norm's solution.
btw for me both need a skyscraper later and it should be r9c8<>15. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
