by StrmCkr » Sat Apr 13, 2024 8:27 pm
Your Z Chan's do hold memory Notation as your last link is blank . Ie a forcing chain similar to a nice loop that acts as a closed loop proving the initial claim is true or false. These have advantage as they can impose changes to a sub-graph based on its assumptions/ implications, they also can be reversible with the added blank digit reintroduced as its unlisted as it's off. How is it off if it isn't retaining memory of a previous event. It does as it's directional implication, a technicality in your Notation system.
Yes
Aic are standardized as xor logic gates(strong link) in digits with weak-inferences on a bidirectional graph transversal from left and right hand of each node. 2005/2006 and adopted here under eureka Notation 2008 and onward, where all forcing chain logic stopped being used except for puzzle past se 9.9 ~
XOR logic gates have 6 single digit types, (bivalve,bi-local, grouped to single, single to group, group to group, eri)
it also has extension xor gates using als, ahs, almost fish, are also defined and standardized)
A weak-inference is specifically &! Logic gate where x digit/cell cannot be true twice for a sector/cell shared between nodes.
As for Notation these xor logic gates are established using: RC, Rn, Cn, Bn space with compression Notation established decades ago
Length counts is node +weak inferences
Readability is much easier and always reversible, and million times easier to teach this.
Xyz wing ( ab=c) r1c14 - (c=a) r3c3 => r2c23<>a
Easiest ie simplest and shortest path
would be shortest link count my displayed move in the first post has 3 strong links and 2 weak inferences which is length 5.
The only parts not firmly document is how multi criteria are listed as simultaneously inferences effecting the next link ( "|" ie and or)
How to utilize ahs that technically cells instead of digits, where ahs into ls are now digits (for Notation purposes only) where aic specifically use Digits not cells.
Most of this predates your publicized work, as for your work these very questions has been a topic on and off for a long time of why haven't you converted to the standard. Every time your reply is read my work end of story/discussion.
Even your own nrc Notation stems back to here from ABs insights into rc, Rn, Cn, Bn grid view that changed how we program.
And look at logic, without references to work me and others did behind the scenes some of your own concepts wouldn't have made you books as we challenged you provided examples etc.
I've have zero disrespect for your work, and weather you know it or not I helped with more then you know I had other correspondents in my stead as my writing is lacklustre on many finer points, My names even credited in your work for some things
So please don't play me off as If I don't get your work, nueanes might lapse time to time but your stuff is unique to you and not used any where else.
I teach others, reference to you and your books, your methods as somethings you have brought are handy and insightful, it is a pain to convert your work back into the Common practices as they simply don't match 1:1.
Even more frustrating is that you don't or rarely acknowledge our work and convert them to what you do it's been a 1 sided street for a long time
this is why I said I didn't want to engage in this rhetoric, it accomplishes nothing.
Asides all this stuff i asked not to engage on : I asked
how is your longer chains used the simplists. Ie easiest method.
When there is examples above of shorter logic and less steps
(iW ring a length length 8 aic chain,[ aic+als+ahs] length 5 => reduce grid to singles in 2 steps.
Some do, some teach, the rest look it up.
stormdoku
