Nothing prevents the use of derived strong links in a "proof" :bat999 wrote: But now it has four nodes instead of three.
Are you suggesting that there isn't a particular name for this type of ALS with cells not all in the same house?
That it is just the compression of two linking ALS and that it is still known only as "ALS"?
ALS(2578)r4c126 -> 7r4c6==8r4c1
ALS(467)r8c6.r9c -> 7r8c6==4r9c4
Therefore, as suggested by JasonLion, "flightless" ALS-XZ Rule : 4r9c4==7r8c6-7r4c6==8r4c1 -> 4r9c4===8r4c1
ALS(4678)r4c89.r8c9 -> 8r4c8==6r5c9
where a multiple = indicates the "level" of a derived strong link.
This allows to write (6=4)r9c8-4r9c4===8r4c1-8r4c8==6r5c9 -> -6r6c8.r78c9
What is ~embarassing, however, is the use of all the cells in R4 [a continuous network].
If you want to "reduce" the number of "nodes", than don't use all the cells in R4!
For example : using ALS(468)r6c89 -> 8r6c8==4r9c8,
- Code: Select all
+------------------+---------------+--------------+
| 236 126 9 | 1236 4 236 | 7 5 8 |
| 235 125 4 | 123 7 8 | 6 23 9 |
| 236 7 8 | 236 9 5 | 4 23 1 |
+------------------+---------------+--------------+
| (258) (25) 3 | 9 6 (27) | 1 47-8 47 |
| 1 4 26 | 237 8 237 | 5 9 67 |
| 6-8 9 7 | 5 1 4 | 2 (68) 3 |
+------------------+---------------+--------------+
| 4 26 256 | 8 3 1 | 9 67 567 |
| 9 3 56 | 467 2 (67) | 8 1 456 |
| 7 8 1 | (46) 5 9 | 3 (46) 2 |
+------------------+---------------+--------------+
The term "Almost Locked Subset" would be very confusing with the usual abbreviated ALS Furthermore :bat999 wrote:Code: Select all
- Code: Select all
.-------------------.---------------.--------------.
| 236 126 9 | 1236 4 236 | 7 5 8 |
| 235 125 4 | 123 7 8 | 6 23 9 |
| 236 7 8 | 236 9 5 | 4 23 1 |
:-------------------+---------------+--------------:
| c258 c25 3 | 9 6 b27 | 1 478 b47 |
| 1 4 2-6 | 237 8 237 | 5 9 67 |
| c68 9 7 | 5 1 4 | 2 68 3 |
:-------------------+---------------+--------------:
| 4 26 256 | 8 3 1 | 9 67 567 |
| 9 3 a56 | 467 2 b67 | 8 1 b456 |
| 7 8 1 | 46 5 9 | 3 46 2 |
'-------------------'---------------'--------------'
(6=5)r8c3 - (5=2)r48c69 - (2=6)r4c12,r6c1 => -6 r5c3; stte
OK, maybe we can use a term "Almost Locked Subset" as in the middle node here.
The four cells r4c6,r4c9,r8c6,r8c9 are a subset and have five candidates 2,4,5,6,7.
This (5=2)r48c69 says to me "NOT5 in r48c69 forces 2 in r48c69".
1. Here, r48c69 is an Almost XYWing : 5r8c9=*XYWing[(7=6)r8c6-(6=*4)r8c9-(4=7)r4c9]-(7=2)r4c6 or 5r8c9=[7r8c6==7r4c9]-(7=2)r4c6 or 5r8c9==2r4c6
2. If r4c9=24, then r48c69 would be an Almost Continuous Chain : 5r8c9=*Loop[(7=6)r8c6-(6=*4)r8c9-(4=2)r4c9-(2=7)r4c6]-...