View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Pat
Joined: 23 Feb 2010 Posts: 207
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 8:43 am Post subject: Pat # 176 # 9 |
|
|
..8...6...4...2.7.5.....2.1.....6.1.....1.....2.5.4...8.6.....5.9.7...4...1...8..
[ play ] Code: |
. . 8 | . . . | 6 . .
. 4 . | . . 2 | . 7 .
5 . . | . . . | 2 . 1
-------+-------+------
. . . | . . 6 | . 1 .
. . . | . 1 . | . . .
. 2 . | 5 . 4 | . . .
-------+-------+------
8 . 6 | . . . | . . 5
. 9 . | 7 . . | . 4 .
. . 1 | . . . | 8 . .
|
the solution-path has an oddity, not very common, i wonder if you'll notice--- |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tlanglet
Joined: 17 Oct 2007 Posts: 2468 Location: Northern California Foothills
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 1:07 pm Post subject: Re: Pat # 176 # 9 |
|
|
Pat wrote: |
the solution-path has an oddity, not very common, i wonder if you'll notice--- |
Pat, the only oddity I noticed is that basics completed the puzzle.
Ted |
|
Back to top |
|
|
keith
Joined: 19 Sep 2005 Posts: 3355 Location: near Detroit, Michigan, USA
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 4:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pat,
I did not notice anything unusual. Of course, I expect that your puzzles might involve hidden sets and not "advanced" moves.
The key for me was to figure out where the values 9 and 3 might fall. I do these things on paper with no pencil marks.
Best wishes,
Keith |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Marty R.
Joined: 12 Feb 2006 Posts: 5770 Location: Rochester, NY, USA
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I guess I didn't go far enough with basics, but a Type 4 UR on 45 completed it since basics didn't do it for me. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Luke451
Joined: 20 Apr 2008 Posts: 310 Location: Southern Northern California
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2012 7:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Howzabout a hint, Pat....before you reveal. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pat
Joined: 23 Feb 2010 Posts: 207
|
Posted: Wed May 30, 2012 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
a 5-move path uses only "basic" moves,
surely that's the natural path
but there is another path
-- and it's just one move,
perhaps more elegant
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
arkietech
Joined: 31 Jul 2008 Posts: 1834 Location: Northwest Arkansas USA
|
Posted: Wed May 30, 2012 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Code: | *--------------------------------------------------------------------*
| 2 1 8 | 39 3579 3579 | 6 359 4 |
| 69 4 39 | 1 *35689 2 | 359 7 *389 |
| 5 36 7 | 34689 34689 389 | 2 389 1 |
|----------------------+----------------------+----------------------|
| 79 38 3459 | 2389 23789 6 | 34579 1 2389 |
| 679 368 3459 | 2389 1 3789 | 34579 23589 2389 |
| 1 2 39 | 5 *3789 4 | 379 6 *389 |
|----------------------+----------------------+----------------------|
| 8 7 6 | 2349 2349 1 | 39 239 5 |
| 3 9 2 | 7 5-8 58 | 1 4 6 |
| 4 5 1 | 2369 2369 39 | 8 239 7 |
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*
x-wing 8 will solve the puzzle with singles |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pat
Joined: 23 Feb 2010 Posts: 207
|
Posted: Wed May 30, 2012 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
exactly
if you notice the X-wing,
it becomes a 1-move puzzle
so,
which path would you prefer ? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
arkietech
Joined: 31 Jul 2008 Posts: 1834 Location: Northwest Arkansas USA
|
Posted: Wed May 30, 2012 3:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pat wrote: | which path would you prefer ? |
I will ignore advanced moves while doing basics. Why? I don't know. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pat
Joined: 23 Feb 2010 Posts: 207
|
Posted: Wed May 30, 2012 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
arkietech wrote: |
I will ignore advanced moves while doing basics
| that's my normal approach,
the 5-move path is what i'd consider natural
i only went looking for something else
because of the additional information i had
background:
i was running some tests on a puzzle-collection for the Patterns Game --
i had generated 386 puzzles
at difficulty-levels which could be interesting for me,
and i wished to post only those puzzles which were in fact worthy of interest
used gsf's software to quickly obtain some measures ---B -f%(V?I2:99)x -q{NF}{B2B3}-G
-B -f%(V?I2:99)x -q{NF}{B2B3H2T2}-G
-B -f%(V?I2:99)x -q{NF}{B2B3H2T2H3T3H4T4}-G
-B -f%(V?I2:99)x -q{NF}{B2B3H2T2H3T3H4T4W2W3W4}-G i.e. ignore "singles" and count other moves --box\line, line\box
+ duos
+ larger subsets (trios, quartets)
+ X-wing, Swordfish, Jellyfish
this only gives me a lower-bound on the number of moves needed,
but that's enough to flag this puzzle as odd:
at least 5 moves needed
until allowing X-wing, Swordfish, Jellyfish
suddenly reduces to a 1-stage puzzle
* lower-bound -- may need more moves (each stage may need more than one move);
still, this information was sufficient for a
reasonable suspicion that there are 2 paths which
differ significantly in the number of moves needed.
finding an upper-bound is a bit messy
. - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . -change -B to -S and you quickly get an upper-bound;
but the information is often not-very-useful,
as it can be quite high
(depends on the order in which the software finds various possible moves);
to get a more meaningful upper-bound,
it is necessary to test several isomorphs,
= messy . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . - . -
eventually i did take the time to solve it (both ways) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|