Extreme Puzzle 116 Daily Telegraph

Post the puzzle or solving technique that's causing you trouble and someone will help

Postby aran » Mon Dec 15, 2008 8:23 pm

udosuk wrote:
aran wrote:Another way of removing 4r5c4 :
459r128c4=6r1c4-(6=3)r1c6-(3=6)r4c6-(6=48)r6c4 (=>pair48 r5c6+r6c4) => <4>r5c4

Not a huge fans of chains like that, but I wonder why did you include the cells r14c6 when you can have it shorter in the opposite direction:

Code: Select all
+-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
| 34      24      249     |#4569    8       36      | 7       1       259     |
| 1       6       2489    |#459     49      7       | 2489    2459    3       |
| 7       348     5       | 1       349     2       | 489     469     689     |
+-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
| 345     1458    148     | 2       14      36      | 1489    4569    7       |
| 6       9       1478    |-478     5      *48      | 1248    3       28      |
| 2       134578  13478   |*468     1347    9       | 148     456     568     |
+-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
| 9       27      6       | 3       27      1       | 5       8       4       |
| 8       234     234     |#49      249     5       | 6       7       1       |
| 45      1457    147     | 78      6       48      | 3       29      29      |
+-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------+

4r5c4-(4=8)r5c6-(48=6)r6c4-(6=459)r128c4-4r5c4 => <4>r5c4


And I'm not a fan of any chain starting with xTrue=> : where you're condemned to find a loop to make any progress.
Furthermore since any elimination found by whatever means can be converted post hoc into a discontinuous nice loop of that sort, I find them inherently unsatisfying.
aran
 
Posts: 334
Joined: 02 March 2007

Postby hobiwan » Mon Dec 15, 2008 10:47 pm

ronk wrote:Suspect your question is directed to Gee, but I see an ALS nice loop and one net (due to a kraken cell) leading to 5 placements ...

01) r8c2 -4- r1c2 -2- r7c2 -7- als:r9c123 -4- r8c2 ==> r8c2<>4

02) kraken cell: either r8c2=5 or r8c2=3 or r8c2=2
r8c2 -5- r9c1 =5= r4c1
r8c2 -3- r8c3 =3= r6c3 -3- r4c1
r8c2 -2- r8c5 =2= r7c5 =7= r6c5 =3= r6c23 -3- r4c1 ==> r4c1<>3

I missed your post while playing with the puzzle. When using a second short ALS in your loop it get's even shorter:
r8c2 -4- ALS:r9c123 -7- ALS:r17c2 -4- r8c2 => r8c2<>4
or as ALS-XY:
A=r1c2 - {24}, B=r9c123 - {1457}, C=r7c2 - {27}, X,Y=2,7, Z=4 => r8c2<>4

[edit: changed X/Y/Z to match notation of XY-Wing]
Last edited by hobiwan on Mon Dec 15, 2008 11:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
hobiwan
2012 Supporter
 
Posts: 321
Joined: 16 January 2008
Location: Klagenfurt

Postby udosuk » Tue Dec 16, 2008 1:17 am

Draco wrote:Another solution (from Gee's PMs) is a contradiction chain, which is I think is just a variation of udosuk's solution (resulting in assignment of a different cell):

r5c9=8 r5c7=2 r5c3=1 r5c4=7 r9c4=8 r9c6=4 r5c6=0 ==> r5c9=2

Your move is more direct, and quicker. Anyway I think you only need to consider 5 cells for your move:

r5c46=[74] => r9c46=[88] invalid
Therefore 8 @ r5,b5 is locked @ r5c46 => r5c9=2

hobiwan wrote:I missed your post while playing with the puzzle. When using a second short ALS in your loop it get's even shorter:
r8c2 -4- ALS:r9c123 -7- ALS:r17c2 -4- r8c2 => r8c2<>4
or as ALS-XY:
A=r1c2 - {24}, B=r9c123 - {1457}, C=r7c2 - {27}, Y,Z=2,7, X=4 => r8c2<>4

or as ALS-xz:
A=r17c2={247}, B=r9c123={1457}, x=7, z=4 => r8c2<>4



aran, I really shouldn't talk about chains since I'm really not into them at all, and I really struggle to understand what everybody's different tastes about them.:(
udosuk
 
Posts: 2698
Joined: 17 July 2005

Postby ttt » Tue Dec 16, 2008 3:44 am

Hi All,
I don’t solve this one, but I saw the solution for this here.
Too many things come to me this time, I can’t solve all of them on time so I forgot them by Vodka…

Very sorry for... nothing:D

ttt
ttt
 
Posts: 185
Joined: 20 October 2006
Location: vietnam

Postby Bigtone53 » Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:02 pm

When sudoku puzzles were first published in the Daily Telegraph, the complier vigorously defended setting puzzles that required trial-and-error. I thought that this had stopped but perhaps one slipped by. I can see that it can be solved logically but the methods seem extreme for a puzzle in a daily paper.
Bigtone53
 
Posts: 413
Joined: 19 September 2005

Postby Bigtone53 » Wed Dec 17, 2008 4:04 am

This is the link I was looking for, with Sue de Coq's comment particularly relevant. Sadly, Michael Mepham is no longer with us.
Bigtone53
 
Posts: 413
Joined: 19 September 2005

Postby DonM » Wed Dec 17, 2008 6:15 am

Bigtone53 wrote:When sudoku puzzles were first published in the Daily Telegraph, the complier vigorously defended setting puzzles that required trial-and-error. I thought that this had stopped but perhaps one slipped by. I can see that it can be solved logically but the methods seem extreme for a puzzle in a daily paper.

Bigtone53 wrote:This is the link I was looking for, with Sue de Coq's comment particularly relevant. Sadly, Michael Mepham is no longer with us.


That quote is from early 2005, well before the techniques that were later developed that avoid the need for T&E in many very difficult puzzles. The difficulty level of this puzzle is fairly typical of the Mepham Group Weekly Extremes that include this puzzle. Using today's available methods, they can be solved without guessing. IMO, if you follow ttt's link, you'll find what I think are the best approaches to manually solving Extreme #116 in a logical manner from beginning to end.
DonM
2013 Supporter
 
Posts: 475
Joined: 13 January 2008

Previous

Return to Help with puzzles and solving techniques