gurth wrote:I couldn't resist this Extreme Jade: my solution is posted on the Advanced Solution Techniques thread.
Thanks again!
gurth wrote:I couldn't resist this Extreme Jade: my solution is posted on the Advanced Solution Techniques thread.
. . 7 4 . . . . .
. 9 . . 5 . . 1 .
8 . . . . 6 3 . .
4 . . . . . 7 . .
. 5 . . . . . 8 .
. . 6 . . . . . 9
. . 2 7 . . . . 5
. 3 . . 8 . . 4 .
1 . . . . 9 2 . . SE 9.1, Pearl 9.0, Turquoise 6.7
. . 7 4 . . . . 2
. 8 . . 5 . 3 . .
9 . . . . 6 . 1 .
4 . . . . . 7 . .
. 5 . . . . . 8 .
. . 6 . . . . . 9
. 3 . 7 . . . . 4
. . . . 8 . . 5 .
1 . . . . 9 . . . GB15: SE 9.2, Pearl 7.2, Turquoise 3.4
9 . . 4 . . 1 . .
. . 8 . 5 . . . 2
. 7 . . . 6 . 3 .
4 . . . . . 7 . .
. 5 . . . . . 8 .
. . 6 . . . . . 9
. . . 7 . . . . .
1 . . . 8 . 4 . .
. . 2 . . 9 . . 6
8 . . 4 . . 1 . .
. . 9 . 5 . . . 2
. 7 . . . 6 . . .
4 . . . . . 7 . .
. 5 . . . . . 8 .
. . 6 . . . . . 9
1 . . 7 . . . 6 .
. . . . 8 . 4 . .
. 2 . . . 9 . . 5
. . 5 3 . . . . .
6 . . . . 7 . . .
. 8 . . 2 . . . .
. . 4 1 . . 7 . .
. 3 . . 6 . . 8 .
9 . . . . 4 . . 5
. . 2 . . 8 . . 9
. 1 . 5 . . 6 . .
7 . . . 9 . . 2 . SE=9.0
1 . . . 3 . . 4 .
. 8 . . . . . 2 .
. . 7 . . . . . .
2 4 . 7 . 5 1 3 .
. 1 . . 2 . 4 . .
. . . 6 . . 5 . .
. 3 . 1 . 6 . . 5
4 2 . . . . 3 1 .
. . . . . . . . .
gurth wrote:The above Jade has JR = 7.8 x 20 = 156.
Can anyone match that, either with their own or with any other puzzle?
*-----------*
|...|...|...|
|5.3|...|...|
|...|...|1.2|
|---+---+---|
|.1.|26.|9..|
|.94|13.|...|
|2..|..7|...|
|---+---+---|
|83.|67.|.1.|
|...|..8|65.|
|...|9..|...|
*-----------*
*-----------*
|...|.71|32.|
|...|...|.8.|
|.61|5..|...|
|---+---+---|
|.7.|...|.9.|
|.4.|...|.6.|
|...|.86|51.|
|---+---+---|
|.2.|...|...|
|.59|23.|...|
|8..|...|...|
*-----------*
gurth wrote:A Jade Challenger
. . . | . 5 1 | 4 2 .
. . . | . 4 . | . 8 .
. 8 3 | 9 . . | . 1 .
-------+-------+-------
. . . | . . . | . 9 .
. 5 . | . . . | . 4 .
. 7 . | . 2 9 | 5 . .
-------+-------+-------
. 2 . | . 6 . | . . .
. 6 5 | 4 8 . | . . .
. . . | . . . | . . .
JPF wrote:Here's one JR = 224 = 6.6 x 34
udosuk wrote:IMHO for a jade to be interesting the minimum SE rating should be at least 7.5...
. . 4 | 9 . . | 3 . .
. 6 . | . . 2 | . . .
5 . . | . 6 . | . . 8
-------+-------+------
. 7 . | . . . | . 1 .
. . 1 | . . . | 9 . .
6 . . | . . . | . . 2
-------+-------+------
2 . . | . 8 . | . . 5
. . . | . . 9 | . 8 .
. . 9 | 3 . . | 7 . .
Where this 7.5 is coming from ? Is it a new sudoku's constant ?udosuk wrote:IMHO for a jade to be interesting the minimum SE rating should be at least 7.5...
gurth wrote:Can anyone match that, either with their own or with any other puzzle?
. . 6 | . 7 . | 4 5 .
. 1 . | 8 . . | . . .
. 2 . | . . . | . . .
-------+-------+-------
7 . . | . 4 . | . . .
4 . . | . . . | . 8 .
. . . | . . . | . . 1
-------+-------+-------
. 8 . | 2 . . | . . .
3 . . | . . . | 7 . .
. . . | 1 . . | . . .
JPF wrote:Where this 7.5 is coming from ? Is it a new sudoku's constant ?
gurth wrote:And the singles in your "better one" were 24, not 29 RW.
gurth wrote:What are your views? Will we have to abandon these formulae, or arrange separate categories of jade?
N. Juillera wrote:More precisely, the Sudoku Explainer uses the following difficulty ratings of the solving techniques:
• 1.0: Last value in block, row or column
• 1.2: Hidden Single in block
• 1.5: Hidden Single in row or column
• 1.7: Direct Pointing
• 1.9: Direct Claiming
• 2.0: Direct Hidden Pair
• 2.3: Naked Single
• 2.5: Direct Hidden Triplet
• 2.6: Pointing
• 2.8: Claiming
• 3.0, 3.2, 3.4: Naked Pair, X-Wing, Hidden Pair
• 3.6, 3.8, 4.0: Naked Triplet, Swordfish, Hidden Triplet
• 4.2, 4.4: XY-Wing, XYZ-Wing
• 4.5 - 5.0: Unique rectangles and loops
• 5.0, 5.2, 5.4: Naked Quad, Jellyfish, Hidden Quad
• 5.6 - 6.0: Bivalue Universal Graves
• 6.2: Aligned Pair Exclusion
• 6.5 - 7.5: Bidirectioal X-Cycles and Y-Cycles
• 6.6 - 7.6: Forcing X-Chains
• 7.0 - 8.0: Forcing Chains, Bidirectional Cycles
• 7.5 - 8.5: Nishio
• 8.0 - 9.0: Cell/Region Forcing Chains
• 8.5 - 9.5: Dynamic Forcing Chains
• 9.0 - 10.0: Dynamic Forcing Chains (+)
• > 9.5: Nested Forcing Chains
It seems that the difficulties 1.2, 1.5, 1.7 and >= 2 correspond to the degrees 1, 2, 3 and 4 of some newspapers. Note that many solvers are rating Naked Singles easier than Hidden Singles (which is reasonable when candidates are always visible). According to some sources, "diabolical" Sudokus are those that are not solvable without trial and error. But there is a great controversy on what "trial and error" means.
The Sudoku generator uses the following levels:
• Easy: difficulty 1.0 to 1.2 (can be solved using Hidden Singles in blocks only)
• Medium: difficulty 1.5 (requires Hidden Singles in rows or columns)
• Hard: difficulty 1.7 to 2.5 (can be solved without writing down candidates)
• Fiendish: difficulty 2.6 to 6.0 (can only be solved by writing down candidates, but does not require Forcing Chains)
• Diabolical: difficulty 6.2 or more (can only be solved with Forcing Chains)
Note that many solvers and generators place Naked Single before Direct Pointing, Direct Claiming and Direct Hidden Pairs, unlike the Sudoku Explainer.
gurth wrote:Meanwhile, I doubt whether there is any point in posting more of these rather unextraordinary puzzles. Or are they of use to someone?