eleven wrote:i just critisized, that by your abbreviation very useful information (for quick understanding), was hidden.
Ok. Really cool solutions, btw!
I borrowed your BUG-Lite for the second puzzle:
- Code: Select all
.--------------------.----------------.------------------.
| e1-7 28 134 | 5 9 6 | f3(7) 48 12 |
| 15679 1567 145 | 2 3 8 | 79 456 156 |
| d569 28 35 | 1 7 4 | ef39 568 256 |
:--------------------+----------------+------------------:
| 8 4 9 | 3 6 5 | 1 2 7 |
| c13+5 15 7 | 49+ 18+ 2 | 6 39+ 48+ |
| c13+6 16 2 | c49+7 18+ 79 | 5 39+ 48+ |
:--------------------+----------------+------------------:
| ad5[7] 9 8 | b67 2 3 | 4 1 56 |
| 4 3 6 | 8 5 1 | 2 7 9 |
| 2 157 15 | 679 4 79 | 8 56 3 |
'--------------------'----------------'------------------'
BUG-Lite (13489)r56c14589
(7)r7c1 = r7c4 - (7==5|6)r6c4,r56c1 - (56=7|9)r73c1 - (79)r1c1,r3c7 = (37)r31c7 => -7 r1c1; stte
----
To be honest, i did not read Leren's 2nd kraken to the end.
Thanks for admitting
Here's that "kraken" translated into something sensible:- Code: Select all
"Kraken Column 9 Digit 2"
(2)r1c9 - (1)r1c9
|| ||
|| (1-7)r1c1 = (7)r1c7
|| ||
|| (1)r1c3 - r9c3 = (1-7)r9c8 = r7c1 - r1c1 = (7)r1c7
||
(2)r3c9 - (5)r3c9
||
(5)r3c1 - (5=7)r7c1 - r1c1 = (7)r1c7
||
(5-3)r3c3 = (3)r3c7
||
(5)r3c8 - r9c8 = r9c23 - (5=7)r7c1 - r1c1 = (7)r1c7
=> -3 r1c7; stte
Now that it's actually krakenized, does the given name make any more sense? No, it does not, because there are actually two krakens but not with the 2s (which have a basic strong link). Furthermore, trivial analysis would have revealed a much simpler elimination. Here's how I'd name and write that:
- Code: Select all
Double Kraken 5R3 & 1R1:
(57)r37c1
||
(53)r3c37 - (3=7)r1c7
||
(5)r3c8 - r9c8 = (57)r7c91
||
(52)r31c9 - (1)r1c9
||
(1)r1c3 - (1=57)b7p91
||
(1)r1c1
=> -7 r1c1; stte
for those who prefer simple nodes: Show
8x8 TM: Show
So... while there was nothing wrong with the logic, the naming was incorrect for several reasons and the presentation was absolutely horrible. But, like I said, even bad examples serve a purpose
Edit: Oops! It appears that my simplification is an exact copy of Cenoman's hidden solution! It's a pure coincidence as I hadn't even seen that! I would have of course mentioned it immediately had I known. Sorry about that!
