Muggy 6

Post puzzles for others to solve here.

Muggy 6

Postby eleven » Sun Dec 29, 2013 7:37 pm

Code: Select all
     +-------+-------+-------+
     | 8 . 7 | 3 . 4 | . 6 1 |
     | . 3 . | 5 . 2 | 7 8 . |
     | . 4 . | 7 . 8 | . . . |
     +-------+-------+-------+
     | 4 . . | . . 6 | . . 3 |
     | . . 5 | 1 8 3 | . 4 7 |
     | . . . | . . . | . . . |
     +-------+-------+-------+
     | . 5 . | . . . | 4 . . |
     | 7 . 4 | . 2 9 | . 3 . |
     | . 8 3 | . 7 . | . 9 6 |
     +-------+-------+-------+
eleven
 
Posts: 2418
Joined: 10 February 2008

Re: Muggy 6

Postby Luke » Sun Dec 29, 2013 11:05 pm

Thanx, eleven, these will be fun/educational.

Code: Select all
*--------------------------------------------------------------------*
 | 8      2      7      | 3      9      4      | 5      6      1      |
 | 169    3      169    | 5      16     2      | 7      8      4      |
 | 5      4      16     | 7      16     8      | 3      2      9      |
 |----------------------+----------------------+----------------------|
 | 4      7      289    |*29     5      6      |*29+8   1      3      |
 | 269   *69     5      | 1      8      3      |*269    4      7      |
 | 3     *69+1   12689  |*29     4      7      |*269+8  5      28     |
 |----------------------+----------------------+----------------------|
 | 269    5      269    | 68     3      1      | 4      7      28     |
 | 7      16     4      | 68     2      9      | 1-8    3      5      |
 | 12     8      3      | 4      7      5      | 12     9      6      |
 *--------------------------------------------------------------------*

(269)MUG band 2
||
(8)r46c7
||
(1)r6c2-r8c2=(1)r8c7
||
(2)r5c7-(2=691)r5c12, r6c2-r8c2=(1)r8c7
Last edited by Luke on Sun Dec 29, 2013 11:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Luke
2015 Supporter
 
Posts: 435
Joined: 06 August 2006
Location: Southern Northern California

Re: Muggy 6

Postby Leren » Sun Dec 29, 2013 11:30 pm

Code: Select all
*--------------------------------------------------------------*
| 8     2     7      | 3     9     4      | 5     6     1      |
|*169   3    *169    | 5    *16    2      | 7     8     4      |
| 5     4    *16     | 7    *16    8      | 3     2     9      |
|--------------------+--------------------+--------------------|
| 4     7     28     | 29    5     6      | 289   1     3      |
| 26    69    5      | 1     8     3      | 269   4     7      |
| 3     169   1268   | 29    4     7      | 2689  5     28     |
|--------------------+--------------------+--------------------|
|*69+2  5    *69+2   | 68    3     1      | 4     7     8-2    |
| 7     16    4      | 68    2     9      | 18    3     5      |
| 1-2   8     3      | 4     7     5      | 12    9     6      |
*--------------------------------------------------------------*

7 Cell DP (169+2) r2c135, r3c35, r7c13. Either r7c1 or r7c3 = 2; => - 2 r7c9, r9c1; stte

Leren
Leren
 
Posts: 3887
Joined: 03 June 2012

Re: Muggy 6

Postby eleven » Sun Dec 29, 2013 11:32 pm

[Edit:] cross posted
@Luke: Great, you also found an alternative uniqueness solution :)
@Leren: That was, what i had in mind.
btw others are welcome.
eleven
 
Posts: 2418
Joined: 10 February 2008

Re: Muggy 6

Postby Luke » Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:32 pm

Code: Select all
*--------------------------------------------------------------*
| 8     2     7      | 3     9     4      | 5     6     1      |
|*69+1  3    *169    | 5    *16    2      | 7     8     4      |
| 5     4    *16     | 7    *16    8      | 3     2     9      |
|--------------------+--------------------+--------------------|
| 4     7     28     | 29    5     6      | 289   1     3      |
| 26    69    5      | 1     8     3      | 269   4     7      |
| 3     169   1268   | 29    4     7      | 2689  5     28     |
|--------------------+--------------------+--------------------|
|*69+2  5    *69+2   | 68    3     1      | 4     7     28     |
| 7     16    4      | 68    2     9      | 18    3     5      |
| 12    8     3      | 4     7     5      | 12    9     6      |
*--------------------------------------------------------------*

Until this series, if I had seen this pattern I'd have worked the (1)=(2) link (overlapping URs) without realizing the +1 could be included in the pattern. In fact, that's exactly what I did :oops:

Proving the (1)r2c1 is part of a MUG pattern is not difficult. All possible arrangements force URs or a no solution state.
User avatar
Luke
2015 Supporter
 
Posts: 435
Joined: 06 August 2006
Location: Southern Northern California

Re: Muggy 6

Postby eleven » Tue Jan 14, 2014 10:26 pm

At second glance (thanks Luke) here you can also look at the externals.
There is only one (in the boxes): r8c2=6.
eleven
 
Posts: 2418
Joined: 10 February 2008

Re: Muggy 6

Postby ronk » Wed Jan 15, 2014 3:08 pm

Luke wrote:
Code: Select all
*--------------------------------------------------------------*
| 8     2     7      | 3     9     4      | 5     6     1      |
|*69+1  3    *169    | 5    *16    2      | 7     8     4      |
| 5     4    *16     | 7    *16    8      | 3     2     9      |
|--------------------+--------------------+--------------------|
| 4     7     28     | 29    5     6      | 289   1     3      |
| 26    69    5      | 1     8     3      | 269   4     7      |
| 3     169   1268   | 29    4     7      | 2689  5     28     |
|--------------------+--------------------+--------------------|
|*69+2  5    *69+2   | 68    3     1      | 4     7     28     |
| 7     16    4      | 68    2     9      | 18    3     5      |
| 12    8     3      | 4     7     5      | 12    9     6      |
*--------------------------------------------------------------*

Until this series, if I had seen this pattern I'd have worked the (1)=(2) link (overlapping URs) without realizing the +1 could be included in the pattern. In fact, that's exactly what I did ...

Proving the (1)r2c1 is part of a MUG pattern is not difficult. All possible arrangements force URs or a no solution state.

By saying that 1r2c1 is part of the uniqueness pattern, I think you are breaking the direct connection between Uniqueness Patterns in the solvers' world and UnAvoidable Sets in the puzzle makers' world. Moreover inclusion of 1r2c1 causes XSUDO to say the pattern is not a MUG (pMUG actually).

There is a subtle definition change going on here, and it apparently is due to the treatment of "no solution states."
ronk
2012 Supporter
 
Posts: 4764
Joined: 02 November 2005
Location: Southeastern USA

Re: Muggy 6

Postby Luke » Wed Jan 15, 2014 8:20 pm

ronk wrote:There is a subtle definition change going on here, and it apparently is due to the treatment of "no solution states."

Thanks for your insight, Ronk. By "definition" I imagine you are referencing the one that includes the idea that all MUGs should break down into BUG-Lites. This pattern does not follow that definition in its current state.

Am I correct in assuming that you do not consider the pattern a reduction of the four-candidate L-shaped MUG prototype that's being studied in this series?

The pattern is "impossible" with (1) in r2c1 because there won't be enough candidates to go around. Isn't that enough to consider it deadly?
User avatar
Luke
2015 Supporter
 
Posts: 435
Joined: 06 August 2006
Location: Southern Northern California

Re: Muggy 6

Postby ronk » Thu Jan 16, 2014 7:31 pm

Luke wrote:Am I correct in assuming that you do not consider the pattern a reduction of the four-candidate L-shaped MUG prototype that's being studied in this series?

Correct, [edit: but only because of the 1r2c1 candidate.]

Luke wrote:The pattern is "impossible" with (1) in r2c1 because there won't be enough candidates to go around. Isn't that enough to consider it deadly?

Deadly in the general sense, yes. But I use the Deadly Pattern (DP) term as a collective for UR, BUG, BUG-Lite and MUG (and did I miss anything?) It has not included impossible patterns and "no solutions." I think it would be a mistake for me to try to change that now. I confuse myself too easily as it is. :)
ronk
2012 Supporter
 
Posts: 4764
Joined: 02 November 2005
Location: Southeastern USA

Re: Muggy 6

Postby Luke » Thu Jan 16, 2014 11:36 pm

ronk wrote:
Luke wrote:Am I correct in assuming that you do not consider the pattern a reduction of the four-candidate L-shaped MUG prototype that's being studied in this series?

Correct, [edit: but only because of the 1r2c1 candidate.]

How about at givens, is this a MUG? (aMUG,pMUG)

Code: Select all
 *-----------*
 |8.7|3.4|.61|
 |.3.|5.2|78.|
 |.4.|7.8|...|
 |---+---+---|
 |4..|..6|..3|
 |..5|183|.47|
 |...|...|...|
 |---+---+---|
 |.5.|...|4..|
 |7.4|.29|.3.|
 |.83|.7.|.96|
 *-----------*

 
 *-----------------------------------------------------------------------------*
 | 8       29      7       | 3       9       4       | 259     6       1       |
 |*169     3      *169     | 5      *169     2       | 7       8       49      |
 |*1269+5  4      *1269    | 7      *169     8       | 2359    25      259     |
 |-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------|
 | 4       1279    1289    | 29      59      6       | 12589   125     3       |
 | 269     269     5       | 1       8       3       | 269     4       7       |
 | 12369   12679   12689   | 249     459     57      | 125689  125     2589    |
 |-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------|
 |*1269    5      *1269    | 68      136     1       | 4       127     28      |
 | 7       16      4       | 68      2       9       | 158     3       58      |
 | 12      8       3       | 4       7       15      | 125     9       6       |
 *-----------------------------------------------------------------------------*
User avatar
Luke
2015 Supporter
 
Posts: 435
Joined: 06 August 2006
Location: Southern Northern California

Re: Muggy 6

Postby blue » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:10 am

ronk wrote:But I use the Deadly Pattern (DP) term as a collective for UR, BUG, BUG-Lite and MUG (and did I miss anything?) It has not included impossible patterns and "no solutions."

Hi ronk,

I do understand what you're driving at.

Technically, though, BUG patterns in "unique" puzzles, have never had solutions.
The same can't always be said for BUG-Lite patterns, but it's seems likely that they haven't always had solutions.

Maybe what you're really objecting to (if that isn't "too strong"), is the idea of a MUG that doesn't satisfy the property that [ it has solutions in the first place, and then ] each of its candidates is part of at least one of its solutions ?

Hairy MUGs -vs- clean shaven :)
blue
 
Posts: 894
Joined: 11 March 2013

Re: Muggy 6

Postby ronk » Fri Jan 17, 2014 1:16 am

Luke wrote:How about at givens, is this a MUG? (aMUG,pMUG)

Code: Select all
 *-----------------------------------------------------------------------------*
 | 8       29      7       | 3       9       4       | 259     6       1       |
 |*169     3      *169     | 5      *169     2       | 7       8       49      |
 |*1269+5  4      *1269    | 7      *169     8       | 2359    25      259     |
 |-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------|
 | 4       1279    1289    | 29      59      6       | 12589   125     3       |
 | 269     269     5       | 1       8       3       | 269     4       7       |
 | 12369   12679   12689   | 249     459     57      | 125689  125     2589    |
 |-------------------------+-------------------------+-------------------------|
 |*1269    5      *1269    | 68      136     1       | 4       127     28      |
 | 7       16      4       | 68      2       9       | 158     3       58      |
 | 12      8       3       | 4       7       15      | 125     9       6       |
 *-----------------------------------------------------------------------------*

There is no contradiction between the pencilmarks and this "fully-populated" permeable MUG (pMUG).

Code: Select all
 .       .       .       | .       .
 1269    .       1269    | .       1269
 1269    .       1269    | .       1269
-------------------------+------------
 .       .       .       | .       .
 .       .       .       | .       .
 .       .       .       | .       .
-------------------------+------------
 1269    .       1269    | .       .
 .       .       .       | .       .
 .       .       .       | .       .

This 8-cell BUG-Lite e.g. is still possible, so the pencilmark "parent" above is still a pMUG.

Code: Select all
 .       .       .       | .       .
 69      .       19      | .       16
 26      .       12      | .       16
-------------------------+------------
 .       .       .       | .       .
 .       .       .       | .       .
 .       .       .       | .       .
-------------------------+------------
 29      .       29      | .       .
 .       .       .       | .       .
 .       .       .       | .       .
ronk
2012 Supporter
 
Posts: 4764
Joined: 02 November 2005
Location: Southeastern USA

Re: Muggy 6

Postby ronk » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:37 pm

blue wrote:
ronk wrote:But I use the Deadly Pattern (DP) term as a collective for UR, BUG, BUG-Lite and MUG (and did I miss anything?) It has not included impossible patterns and "no solutions."
Technically, though, BUG patterns in "unique" puzzles, have never had solutions.
The same can't always be said for BUG-Lite patterns, but it's seems likely that they haven't always had solutions.

Don't know about Luke's usage for sure but my "no solution" here is as an alias for impossible solution.

blue wrote:Maybe what you're really objecting to (if that isn't "too strong"), is the idea of a MUG that doesn't satisfy the property that [ it has solutions in the first place, and then ] each of its candidates is part of at least one of its solutions ?

Hairy MUGs -vs- clean shaven :)

LOL, but I do think every candidate of a fully-populated permeable MUG must be a member of at least one possible fully-permeated DP.
ronk
2012 Supporter
 
Posts: 4764
Joined: 02 November 2005
Location: Southeastern USA

Re: Muggy 6

Postby Luke » Fri Jan 17, 2014 7:08 pm

Cool stuff!

The "Muggy" puzzle series was offered up as a "Find The MUG" challenge. I did not recognize the Muggy 6 pattern as a MUG, so when it was revealed as the correct solution I applied one of my personal MUG-proving methods to it. Some variations resulted in the pattern having no solutions. That is all I meant by the term.

I've done this before without raising objections, like with this MUG.

I am aware that certain patterns are impossible without relying on uniqueness, like broken wings or oddagons. If this pattern is not a MUG but an impossible, that's fine with me!

In fact, it's very interesting to become aware of a new impossible pattern that has to my knowledge never been specifically ID'd before....if that indeed is what's happening here.

I'd be interested in what eleven has to say...
User avatar
Luke
2015 Supporter
 
Posts: 435
Joined: 06 August 2006
Location: Southern Northern California

Re: Muggy 6

Postby eleven » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:46 pm

Luke wrote:I'd be interested in what eleven has to say...

Hm, i like the pattern, and i call it MUG like Myth, who has found it.
And i like the combination of "impossible" and "uniqueness" arguments.
eleven
 
Posts: 2418
Joined: 10 February 2008

Next

Return to Puzzles