The New Sudoku Players' Forum

[Mike Barker]

I guess Explainer doesn't implement empty rectangles in searching for X-cycles. If it did then then Mauricio's pretty puzzle (sans Jellyfish) wouldn't get a 9.5 rating. It can be solved with four empty rectangles (aka grouped strong links or hinges) with a beautifully symmetrical result. (Even prettier of you rearrange to rows to end up with a border bingo!) Reminds me of a puzzle from a long time ago - maybe someone else remembers it.

Code: Select all

Four Grouped Strong Links:
   r456c1 =9= r4c23 -9- r4c78 =9= r456c9 -9- r789c9 =9= r7c78 -9- r7c23 =9= r789c1 -9- r456c1
   => r4c14569<>9,r123c9<>9,r7c14569<>9,r123c1<>9
+-----------------------+-----------------------------+-----------------------+
| 345678-9  6789  4569  |   25679     25789    25689  | 3489   179  123478-9  |
| 345678-9  6789  4569  |   25679         1    25689  | 3489    79   23478-9  |
|     78-9     1     2  |       3       789        4  |    5     6      78-9  |
+-----------------------+-----------------------------+-----------------------+
|   1568-9*  689*  569* | 12457-9  234578-9  12358-9  |  349*   59*   3456-9* |
|     1569*    2     3  |    1459       459      159  |    7     8      4569* |
|      589*    4     7  |      59         6     3589  |    1     2       359* |
+-----------------------+-----------------------------+-----------------------+
|   2467-9*  679*  469* | 12456-9    2345-9  12356-9  |   89* 1579*   1578-9* |
|       29*    3     1  |       8       259        7  |    6     4        59* |
|     4679*    5     8  |    1469        49      169  |    2     3       179* |
+-----------------------+-----------------------------+-----------------------+

[tarek]

what a nice loop

you have to see them all at once to make the connection .... but still should be easier than 9.5

tarek

[ronk]

I guess Explainer doesn't implement empty rectangles in searching for X-cycles.

Does SE do any single-digit candidate grouping? For that matter, does it do ALS candidate grouping?

[tarek]

thanx Pat for picking that up.....

This just tells you how batch solving misses things...

The Jellyfish in 9s has such a devastating effect on the the Jellyfish in 4s that leaves it non existant.

that Jellyfish in 4s was needed to solve if solving with singles only ....

It actually can't be solved with singles only if you apply it first .. so in a way it is not Pure at all

this can be -hopefully- spotted electronically in the future &I will re-run all the puzzles again

[gsf]

I added mutiple pass per puzzle to my solver by allowing mutiple -q... options
this almost captures the analysis in this thread
what's missing is a bit of memory after each pass
and a way of accessing that memory when all passes are done for a given puzzle

you can now append ;name=expression... to each -q option
the names can be accessed in -e expressions and -f formats
this provides the per-pass memory needed for the final analysis for each puzzle

pick up version 2008-01-12 and try with these options (listed one per line -- put them all on one)
it will print the grid and jf score * 10 as a comment (expressions are integer)
there may be a diff in the 7 and 8 (70 and 80) scores because my X constraints are a bit stronger than the (7.) list
the C ?: ternary operator is cumbersome but effective

Code: Select all

-BG
-q'FN;v_1=V'
-q'{FNBTHW2W3}{W4}-G;v_2=V&&h2;h_2=h2;b_2=b2;i_2=i2'
-q'{FN}{W4}-G;v_3=V&h2;h_3=h2;b_3=b2;i_3=i2'
-q'{FNBTHW2W3X}{W4}-G;v_4=V&&h2;h_4=h2'
-f'%v%,#%,%(v_1?(v_2?(v_3?((b_2>b_3||b_2==b_3&&i_2>=i_3)?(S?(C1?((v_4&&h_4)?80:70):60):50):((b_2==b_3)?42:41)):30):20):10)x'


[tarek]

I will hopefully revist the puzzles using your solver & my improved Jellyfish catcher & see what results....we can bring out...

Probably by the weekend

tarek

[tarek]

Code: Select all

Four Grouped Strong Links:
   r456c1 =9= r4c23 -9- r4c78 =9= r456c9 -9- r789c9 =9= r7c78 -9- r7c23 =9= r789c1 -9- r456c1
   => r4c14569<>9,r123c9<>9,r7c14569<>9,r123c1<>9
+-----------------------+-----------------------------+-----------------------+
| 345678-9  6789  4569  |   25679     25789    25689  | 3489   179  123478-9  |
| 345678-9  6789  4569  |   25679         1    25689  | 3489    79   23478-9  |
|     78-9     1     2  |       3       789        4  |    5     6      78-9  |
+-----------------------+-----------------------------+-----------------------+
|   1568-9*  689*  569* | 12457-9  234578-9  12358-9  |  349*   59*   3456-9* |
|     1569*    2     3  |    1459       459      159  |    7     8      4569* |
|      589*    4     7  |      59         6     3589  |    1     2       359* |
+-----------------------+-----------------------------+-----------------------+
|   2467-9*  679*  469* | 12456-9    2345-9  12356-9  |   89* 1579*   1578-9* |
|       29*    3     1  |       8       259        7  |    6     4        59* |
|     4679*    5     8  |    1469        49      169  |    2     3       179* |
+-----------------------+-----------------------------+-----------------------+

These also are nice alternatives:

Code: Select all

*-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
|-3456789 *4589    *359     | 56789    26789    25689   |*279     *1479    -1234789 |
|-3456789 *4589    *359     | 56789    1        25689   |*279     *479     -234789  |
|-789      1        2       | 3        789      4       | 5        6       -789     |
|---------------------------+---------------------------+---------------------------|
|-14589   *4589    *159     |-146789  -2346789 -123689  |*679     *179     -15679   |
| 1459     2        7       | 1469     469      169     | 3        8        1569    |
| 189      3        6       | 1789     5        189     | 4        2        179     |
|---------------------------+---------------------------+---------------------------|
|-12359   *59      *1359    |-145689  -34689   -135689  |*2679    *479     -24679   |
| 39       6        8       | 2        349      7       | 1        5        49      |
| 1259     7        4       | 1569     69       1569    | 8        3        269     |
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
Franken Jellyfish c2378/r47b13 [r123c19][r47c14569]<>9

*-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
|-3456789  4589     359     | 56789    26789    25689   | 279      1479    -1234789 |
|-3456789  4589     359     | 56789    1        25689   | 279      479     -234789  |
|-789      1        2       | 3        789      4       | 5        6       -789     |
|---------------------------+---------------------------+---------------------------|
|-14589    4589     159     |-146789  -2346789 -123689  | 679      179     -15679   |
|*1459     2        7       |*1469    *469     *169     | 3        8       *1569    |
|*189      3        6       |*1789     5       *189     | 4        2       *179     |
|---------------------------+---------------------------+---------------------------|
|-12359    59       1359    |-145689  -34689   -135689  | 2679     479     -24679   |
|*39       6        8       | 2       *349      7       | 1        5       *49      |
|*1259     7        4       |*1569    *69      *1569    | 8        3       *269     |
*-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
Franken Jellyfish r5689/c19b58 [r123c19][r47c14569]<>9

tarek

[Mauricio]

These also are nice alternatives:

If Jellyfishes are forbidden I would think that any variations of it are forbidden too.

By the way, in this pencilmark (a sudoku I posted in the previous page), sudocue and sudoku explainer fail to see the 4343 Jellyfish in <4> (c2378/r1247), in sudocue you can confirm it if you put Jellyfish at the top of the solving techniques and in sudocu explainer you can press F3 repeatedly until you pass the Jellyfish rating. Does anyone know why this happens? Is there a way to confirm whether this happens in SS, gsf or not?

Code: Select all

.------------------------.------------------------.------------------------.
| 34569   49      469    | 26      7       58     | 1489    249     1234   |
| 345679  479     469    | 26      1       58     | 489     249     234    |
| 8       1       2      | 3       9       4      | 5       6       7      |
:------------------------+------------------------+------------------------:
| 2467    2479    469    | 5       8       3      | 149     249     1246   |
| 29      3       5      | 4       6       1      | 7       8       29     |
| 46      8       1      | 7       2       9      | 3       5       46     |
:------------------------+------------------------+------------------------:
| 24      249     8      | 1       3       6      | 49      7       5      |
| 1       5       7      | 9       4       2      | 6       3       8      |
| 49      6       3      | 8       5       7      | 2       1       49     |
'------------------------'------------------------'------------------------'

[gsf]

By the way, in this pencilmark (a sudoku I posted in the previous page), sudocue and sudoku explainer fail to see the 4343 Jellyfish in <4> (c2378/r1247), in sudocue you can confirm it if you put Jellyfish at the top of the solving techniques and in sudocu explainer you can press F3 repeatedly until you pass the Jellyfish rating. Does anyone know why this happens? Is there a way to confirm whether this happens in SS, gsf or not?

with the default -q order in my solver it solves with 1 hidden pair and then singles
with -qFNW4 (singles and jellyfish only) it finds two jellyfish, same position, one in 4, the other in 9

[tarek]

These also are nice alternatives:

If Jellyfishes are forbidden I would think that any variations of it are forbidden too.

Explainer only uses basic fish (rrrr/cccc) or (cccc/rrrr)

Explainer has NO :
1. more complex unfinned fish (fanken or mutant)
2. finned fish (basic, franken nor mutant)
3. empty rectangle

tarek

[Pat]

in this pencilmark (a sudoku I posted in the previous page),
sudocue and sudoku explainer fail to see the 4343 Jellyfish in 4 (c2378\r1247)

in sudocue you can confirm it if you put Jellyfish at the top of the solving techniques
and in sudoku explainer you can press F3 repeatedly until you pass the Jellyfish rating

Does anyone know why this happens?

Code: Select all

.------------------------.------------------------.------------------------.
| 34569   49      469    | 26      7       58     | 1489    249     1234   |
| 345679  479     469    | 26      1       58     | 489     249     234    |
| 8       1       2      | 3       9       4      | 5       6       7      |
:------------------------+------------------------+------------------------:
| 2467    2479    469    | 5       8       3      | 149     249     1246   |
| 29      3       5      | 4       6       1      | 7       8       29     |
| 46      8       1      | 7       2       9      | 3       5       46     |
:------------------------+------------------------+------------------------:
| 24      249     8      | 1       3       6      | 49      7       5      |
| 1       5       7      | 9       4       2      | 6       3       8      |
| 49      6       3      | 8       5       7      | 2       1       49     |
'------------------------'------------------------'------------------------'



SuDoku Explainer does find the Jellyfish 4 -- if you feed it the original puzzle --

.............1.....123.456...........35...78..81.2.35...........57...63..638.721.

-- however, at the point you posted, the 4 is already known 3 times and only missing 6 times -- i expect SuDoku Explainer to find the X-wing r69\c19 rather than the complementary Jellyfish.

[tarek]

Code: Select all

-BG
-q'FN;v_1=V'
-q'{FNBTHW2W3}{W4}-G;v_2=V&&h2;h_2=h2;b_2=b2;i_2=i2'
-q'{FN}{W4}-G;v_3=V&h2;h_3=h2;b_3=b2;i_3=i2'
-q'{FNBTHW2W3X}{W4}-G;v_4=V&&h2;h_4=h2'
-f'%v%,#%,%(v_1?(v_2?(v_3?((b_2>b_3||b_2==b_3&&i_2>=i_3)?(S?(C1?((v_4&&h_4)?80:70):60):50):((b_2==b_3)?42:41)):30):20):10)x'


That is great......
One more request to make sure that PURENESS can be confirmed electronically.

the -JN option in your solver shuffles the puzzle N times & processes the shuffled result each time. that shuffling doesn't include digit permutation.

if it does, then we could filter out the smallest iteration count for W4 in non-batch mode as the (Required number) of Jellyfish

tarek

[gsf]

the -JN option in your solver shuffles the puzzle N times & processes the shuffled result each time. that shuffling doesn't include digit permutation.

digit permutation is a good idea
grab the 2008-02-02 version
you might be able to use the min() and max() functions

Code: Select all

-e 'min(W4)+max(W4)+1' -Ff'%(min())x %(max())x'

the -Ff (final) format will print the min(W4) and max(W4) values of all processed puzzles
use -f- if all you are interested in is the -Ff output

[tarek]

That's great,

I've just tried it & it electronically confirmed what Pat said earlier regarding Mauricio's last puzzle "Mauricio-004", it needs only 1 Jellyfish when intermediate techniques are present.

That wouldn't allow it to climb up the ranks,

This would also help some other puzzles that suffered injustice from the batch examination.

it also shows that "tarek-006" needs 2 Jellyfish to solve

I'll be using gsf's program to check that from now on & will also check on the pure swordfish collection too

thanx gsf,

tarek

[gsf]

I'll be using gsf's program to check that from now on & will also check on the pure swordfish collection too

glad it worked
when you get it set up can you post the options used for each solver pass
thanks