dailysudoku.com Forum Index dailysudoku.com
Discussion of Daily Sudoku puzzles
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Puzzle 10/06/15: (C) XY
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    dailysudoku.com Forum Index -> Puzzles by daj
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
daj95376



Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 3854

PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 2:50 pm    Post subject: Puzzle 10/06/15: (C) XY Reply with quote

Code:
 +-----------------------+
 | 4 . 7 | 9 . . | . 8 . |
 | . 3 . | . 7 . | 6 . 4 |
 | . . . | 1 . . | . 9 . |
 |-------+-------+-------|
 | 7 . 2 | . . . | . . . |
 | . 8 . | . 1 . | . . . |
 | . 1 . | . . 4 | . . . |
 |-------+-------+-------|
 | . 5 . | 8 . . | 1 . . |
 | . . 1 | . . . | 9 . 8 |
 | 2 4 . | . . . | . 3 . |
 +-----------------------+

Play this puzzle online at the Daily Sudoku site

Code:
 after basics
 +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
 |  4      26     7      |  9      2356   2356   |  235    8      1      |
 |  1      3      9      |  25     7      8      |  6      25     4      |
 |  8      26     5      |  1      4      236    |  237    9      237    |
 |-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------|
 |  7      9      2      |  356    8      56     |  4      1      356    |
 |  356    8      4      |  23567  1      9      |  235    2567   2356   |
 |  356    1      36     |  23567  256    4      |  8      2567   9      |
 |-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------|
 |  9      5      36     |  8      236    7      |  1      4      26     |
 |  36     7      1      |  4      2356   2356   |  9      256    8      |
 |  2      4      8      |  56     9      1      |  57     3      567    |
 +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
 # 66 eliminations remain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
peterj



Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Posts: 974
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For me this was a real BBDB+ and involved probably one too many glasses of Pouilly Fuisse... My first pass had more finned fish then I can remember, but an intentionally more xy route was this one - for six steps!

Quote:
w-wing(56) (using a pair) (6=5)r9c4 - r2c4=r2c8 - (5=26)r7c9|r8c8; r9c9<>6
grouped x-chain(2) (2)r2c8=r2c4 - r56c4=r6c5 - r78c5=r8c6 - r8c8=r7c9; r3c9<>2, r8c8<>2
finned x-wing(2) r26c48 fin r6c5; r5c4<>2
w-wing(25) (5=2)r2c4 - r6c4=r6c5 -(2=5)r8c5; r1c5<>5
xy-wing(357) r1c6; r3c7<>7
BUG+1; r5c8=5


Feel sure someone will come up with some UR/DP action... but not me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
daj95376



Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 3854

PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 6:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My solver found five necessary steps ... three extraneous steps ... and the lone XY level step was in the middle of the necessary steps.

Peter, nice job of plowing through a rough puzzle!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mogulmeister



Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1151

PostPosted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Step 1 is an overeach but I stick it out there just to test a new way of text formatting and how not to be beguiled:

1)HUR @ r13c26 and to prevent DP can we really say {356} exists in r134c6 so r8c6 =2 ? (Rolling Eyes )


Code:
+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------+
| 4     26    7     | 9     2356  26+35 | 235   8     1     |
| 1     3     9     | 25    7     8     | 6     25    4     |
| 8     26    5     | 1     4     26+3  | 237   9     237   |
+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------+
| 7     9     2     | 356   8     56    | 4     1     356   |
| 356   8     4     | 23567 1     9     | 235   2567  2356  |
| 356   1     36    | 23567 256   4     | 8     2567  9     |
+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------+
| 9     5     36    | 8     236   7     | 1     4     26    |
| 36    7     1     | 4     2356  2356  | 9     256   8     |
| 2     4     8     | 56    9     1     | 57    3     567   |
+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------+


2)After clean up, Skyscraper on 5s in rows 2 and 8 to complete puzzle but no cigar. Smile

PS I will still be sticking up my coloured grids from time to time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
peterj



Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Posts: 974
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mm, my undestanding fwiw is that the UR forms a single pseudo-cell of (35) and so to lock the candidates {356} you need two more cells containing only those candidates - not just the one. But I could easily be completely wrong!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mogulmeister



Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1151

PostPosted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quite so Peter. I did say it was a lesson on how not to be beguiled. Smile So yes.

It is a good example of a false positive. Something we have all experienced in the 9x9 game.

[Ed]Just looking at that original HUR (without external implications) the only safe elimination that can be made is that the DP will be made if we place 2 into r1c6 so r1c6<>2 but that doesn't advance us very far.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
peterj



Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Posts: 974
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry misunderstood!
One of the problems of using SS rather than paper IMO is you can accidentally (or intentionally Laughing ) try those eliminations, find they are hugely constructive and then spend 30 minutes desperately trying to justify them...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
daj95376



Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 3854

PostPosted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 4:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ouch!!! I missed the necessity of the grouped 2-String Kite. This puzzle was harder than I'd planned. Sorry!!!

Code:
 r26\c48 finned  X-Wing                  <> 2    r5c4        -or-
 r2  b6  Empty Rectangle                 <> 2    r5c4

 r2c6    2-String Kite (grouped)         <> 2    r8c8

 r29\c48 Sashimi X-Wing                  <> 5    r8c8        -or-
 r2  b8  Empty Rectangle                 <> 5    r8c8

 W-Wing (5=2)r2c4 - r6c4 = r6c5 - (2=5)r8c5  =>  r1c5<>5     -or-
 W-Wing (5=2)r2c4 - r3c6 = r8c6 - (2=5)r8c5  =>  r1c5<>5

 <35+7>  XY-Wing  r1c7/r3c9+r9c7         <> 7    r3c7,r9c9

         BUG+1                           =  5    r5c8
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mogulmeister



Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1151

PostPosted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 4:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

An excellent puzzle Danny - especially if it generates talking points! Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
peterj



Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Posts: 974
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It was the lack of "BBDB" label that had me working hard at it - thinking there must be a quicker way.

In some ways it's good not to have the label give too much away - makes it more of a surprise!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mogulmeister



Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1151

PostPosted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agreed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
daj95376



Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 3854

PostPosted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I (typically) use BBDB on puzzles where my solver seems to need more than four steps. On XY puzzles, I tend not to use BBDB unless there are more than five steps. When I originally counted five steps for this puzzle, I decided to drop the BBDB from the title.

FWIW: I include the BBDB so you won't unexpectedly tackle a puzzle that might be time consuming. This was a problem I heard about previous to using BBDB.

Regards, Danny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Marty R.



Joined: 12 Feb 2006
Posts: 5770
Location: Rochester, NY, USA

PostPosted: Fri Jun 18, 2010 1:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I used three ERs (5,2,6). After that it was coloring on 2, or something akin to coloring. It might've had an AIC component, but that's not exactly my forte, so I'll leave it at coloring.

P.S. I may have screwed up since I can't re-create my solution using Danny's post-basics grid. Sad

But you tell me if this is valid.

Here's Danny's grid after my three ERs.

Code:

+-----------+----------------+---------------+
| 4   26 7  | 9    2356 2356 | 235 8    1    |
| 1   3  9  | 25   7    8    | 6   25   4    |
| 8   26 5  | 1    4    236  | 237 9    237  |
+-----------+----------------+---------------+
| 7   9  2  | 35   8    56   | 4   1    356  |
| 356 8  4  | 357  1    9    | 235 2567 2356 |
| 356 1  36 | 2357 256  4    | 8   57   9    |
+-----------+----------------+---------------+
| 9   5  36 | 8    23   7    | 1   4    26   |
| 36  7  1  | 4    235  235  | 9   26   8    |
| 2   4  8  | 6    9    1    | 57  3    57   |
+-----------+----------------+---------------+

Play this puzzle online at the Daily Sudoku site

r7c5=2
r7c9<>2
r8c8=2
r2c8<>2
r2c4=2
r6c4<>2;
r6c5<>2

P.P.S I get the feeling it's not kosher.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
daj95376



Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 3854

PostPosted: Fri Jun 18, 2010 3:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Marty R. wrote:
r7c5=2 r7c9<>2 r8c8=2 r2c8<>2 r2c4=2 r6c4<>2; r6c5<>2

P.P.S I get the feeling it's not kosher.

Almost kosher:

r7c5=2 r7c9<>2 r8c8=2 r2c8<>2 r2c4=2 r6c4<>2 r6c5=2; r7c5<>2

As an AIC:

(2): r7c9 = r8c8 - r2c8 = r2c4 - r6c4 = r6c5; r7c5<>2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Marty R.



Joined: 12 Feb 2006
Posts: 5770
Location: Rochester, NY, USA

PostPosted: Fri Jun 18, 2010 3:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Danny, but I'm all screwed up now. If r7c5=2, then r6c4<>2. If r6c4=2, then r7c5<>2. So with opposite polarity, r6c5<>2. However, maybe that just works out in this case by accident and doesn't have to work out that way as conventional coloring using strong links would.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
daj95376



Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 3854

PostPosted: Fri Jun 18, 2010 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Marty R. wrote:
Thanks Danny, but I'm all screwed up now. If r7c5=2, then r6c4<>2. If r6c4=2, then r7c5<>2. So with opposite polarity, r6c5<>2. However, maybe that just works out in this case by accident and doesn't have to work out that way as conventional coloring using strong links would.

The conclusion is based on the contradiction of assuming r7c5=2 and arriving at r6c5=2 as well. Since this can't be the case, the original assumption of r7c5=2 must be wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mogulmeister



Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1151

PostPosted: Fri Jun 18, 2010 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Marty - you have a discontinuous loop with an inherent contradiction (a Baphomet ! Smile )

Just extending on Danny's point a little:

Follow your loop round and you will see that if you start r7c5 as 2 or true when you follow the loop around it becomes false which is a contradiction so r7c5 <>2.

I have colour coded your logic below. Start on the target cell (purple) as true for 2 then follow your sequence. Green is true for 2 and orange is false.

In notation it can be shown as an extension of Danny's chain:

IS 2.........NOT 2......IS 2.........NOT 2.......IS 2
(2)r7c5-r7c9 = r8c8 - r2c8 = r2c4 - r6c4 = r6c5-(2)r7c5 so r7c5<>2



Last edited by Mogulmeister on Fri Jun 18, 2010 3:52 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Marty R.



Joined: 12 Feb 2006
Posts: 5770
Location: Rochester, NY, USA

PostPosted: Fri Jun 18, 2010 3:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Danny and MM. I'll have to pay more attention to that stuff.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mogulmeister



Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1151

PostPosted: Fri Jun 18, 2010 3:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've annotated the chain so it might help with the AIC you created.....

If you can look past the guffaws and ribaldry ( Laughing ) this thread should help

http://www.dailysudoku.com/sudoku/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4623&highlight=baphomet&sid=25e1d3d76f7ddbfe3299c0d734db2f8b
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
daj95376



Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 3854

PostPosted: Fri Jun 18, 2010 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Marty R. wrote:
Thanks Danny and MM. I'll have to pay more attention to that stuff.

If you start by assuming that something is true, then the only acceptable outcome is that the assumption is false. This is a common approach used by ronk, Asellus, and others. In Mogulmeister's chain:

Code:
assumed to                                        found  to      conclusion
be    true                                        be  false
**********                                        *********      **********

(2)r7c5 - r7c9 = r8c8 - r2c8 = r2c4 - r6c4 = r6c5 - (2)r7c5  =>  r7c5<>2

The other option is to start by assuming that something is false and finding another place where it is true. Anything that sees both must be false. This is how Myth Jellies documented the AIC ... and it's what I use 99.99% of the time. Using this approach, MM's chain is shortened to:

Code:
assumed to                           found  to         conclusion
be   false                           be   true
**********                           *********         **********

(2)r7c9 =  r8c8 - r2c8 = r2c4 - r6c4 = (2)r6c5     =>  r7c5<>2
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    dailysudoku.com Forum Index -> Puzzles by daj All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group