The New Sudoku Players' Forum

[gsf]

the 3d one is already there

I believe coloin had them in the wrong order. The second one was the new puzzle:

Code: Select all

...4........7...3...9...6..........4.....8.7.6.832....3............9.5...7......8

thanks
so these are the 3 new ones in solution grid row canonical order

Code: Select all

.2.4....9..6.8.........................9.7.....8...61.5....1....9....4.2....6...7
1....6..........2..9.....4....9.....3.......6..5.4......2.........1.5..8.49...5..
1....6..........2..9.....4....9.....3.......6..5.4......2.........1.5.98.4....5..


btw, I posted a solver update, and the canonical form is now the more natural row-normal,
with the top row fixed to 123456789, so if you are using my solver be sure to recalibrate
any catalogs using the new -f%c and/or -f%C output -- more on this in the canonical thread

[JPF]

Things are moving quickly here !

Are those three puzzles already in the list?
...4........7...3...9...6..........4.....8.736.8.2....3............9.1...7......8
...4........7...3...9...6..........4.....8.7.6.8.2...53............9.1...7......8
...4........7...3...9...6..........4.....8.7.6.832....3............9.1...7......8

these are already in the list (gordon(36621) + wolfgang(1) + papy(2))

the 3d one is already there

I believe coloin had them in the wrong order. The second one was the new puzzle:

Code: Select all

...4........7...3...9...6..........4.....8.7.6.832....3............9.5...7......8

thanks
so these are the 3 new ones in solution grid row canonical order

Code: Select all

.2.4....9..6.8.........................9.7.....8...61.5....1....9....4.2....6...7
1....6..........2..9.....4....9.....3.......6..5.4......2.........1.5..8.49...5..
1....6..........2..9.....4....9.....3.......6..5.4......2.........1.5.98.4....5..


I'm lost.
I counted 36628 in the Gordon's list...
From the 3 new ones, how many from Papy, from Wolfgang, from... ?

Thanks.

JPF.

[coloin]

Yes well spotted,

Code: Select all

these are already in the list (gordon(36621) + wolfgang(1) + papy(2))

I dont think gsf was ever suggesting it was a competition ![im still chuckling]

Can we agree on which puzzle representation to use ?
I would suggest the

Code: Select all

+---+---+---+
|123|456|789|
|456|...|...|
|789|...|...|
+---+---+---+
|...|...|...|
|...|...|...|
|...|...|...|
+---+---+---+
|...|...|...|
|...|...|...|
|...|...|...|
+---+---+---+

as it is easier to spot the puzzles from similar grids this way.

Edit - I see you have suggested this

Gordon's original normalization would have to remain I suppose.

BTW the puzzle number in Gordon's file will change if/when it is updated when a new grid is added !

[gsf]

Things are moving quickly here !

these are already in the list (gordon(36621) + wolfgang(1) + papy(2))

I'm lost.
I counted 36628 in the Gordon's list...
From the 3 new ones, how many from Papy, from Wolfgang, from... ?

thanks
the 36621 should be 36627
wofgang's 1 was posted here
papy has 2 plus the extra one found by coloin in papy's grid (still attributed to papy)
so it should be:

Code: Select all

gordon(36627) + wolfgang(1) + papy(3)

[coloin]

Yes, please attribute it to papy

I was sent, from Japan, a number of new 17-clue Sudokus. He or she (I can't tell from the name!) had constructed 700 puzzles, of which 33 were not already on the list.

And to be fair to wolfgang he had previously found one other 17 [earlier in this thread]

Code: Select all

(gordon(36593) + Japan (33) + wolfgang(2) + papy(3))

C

[RW]

This collection was mainly produced by my own software, although Kohei Noshita has contributed a few hundred of them.

I guess the unidentified Japanese source has been revealed.

RW

[Red Ed]

I think that this is another new 17, #one#two-off (delete a clue, add a clue) from Gordon's #28488:

Code: Select all

.1.2...3.4.....5.....6.....7...4.....2......6....5....5...73....8....4..........7

Is anyone else bothering to do this #one#two-off search? It's awfully tedious. I wish Gordon had done it for us!

[ronk]

I think that this is another new 17, two-off from Gordon's #28488

Assuming the new total would be 36632 puzzles with 17 clues, I can confirm it's a new one. Congratulations!

My computer is too slow, so I'm not searching for two-offs.

[Red Ed]

Another #one#two-off (delete a clue, add a clue):

Code: Select all

12.......3...4.......5..2....5....4...6.........6.1.3...7..86.......3..........5.

[JPF]

Another one-off:

Code: Select all

12.......3...4.......5..2....5....4...6.........6.1.3...7..86.......3..........5.

are these two in the list ?

Code: Select all

12.......3...4.......5..2....5....4...6.........6.1.3...9..86.......3..........5.
12.......3...4.......5..2....5....4...6.........6.1.3...7..96.......3..........5.


JPF

[Red Ed]

JPF, your two puzzles are isomorphic to each other and to the puzzle that I just posted. I've noticed that changing a clue often results in an isomorph when the puzzle has 17 clues. Not at all sure why that should be.

But ... you've made me realise that my phrase "one off" is bad terminology for what I've been doing. Following Papy's lead, I've been taking Gordon's puzzles and deleting a clue (one cell write operation: cell[r] = 0) then adding a new one (another cell write operation: cell[s] = v). I think that this should be called "two off", not "one off" as I had said previously. What you've just done -- simply replacing one value with another -- genuinely is a one-off analysis.

So I'm going to go back and edit my previous few posts accordingly.

[JPF]

Sorry.
In this case, the isomorphism is obvious :
9 is missing in your "new" 17

JPF

[Red Ed]

... your "new" 17

tsk, tsk, JPF -- you shouldn't begrudge me finding a new 17 when I'm prepared to add to my electricity bill with a long and mindless 2-off search.

Well spotted on the isomorphism. I miss the most obvious things sometimes.

[JPF]

Well spotted on the isomorphism.

I should have seen it before my posting.

I'm prepared to add to my electricity bill with a long and mindless 2-off search.

TIA, if it's your intention to do this 2-off search for the 36628 puzzles !

How would you call a x-off with : cell[r1]=cell[r2]=0 and adding 2 new cells cell[s1]=v1 ; cell[s2]=v2 ?

JPF

[Red Ed]

You mean apart from calling it a 4-off? How about "expensive!"