No new 17s within {-2+2}

Everything about Sudoku that doesn't fit in one of the other sections

Re:

Postby Serg » Tue Oct 07, 2014 2:13 pm

< Withdrown >
Serg
2017 Supporter
 
Posts: 513
Joined: 01 June 2010
Location: Russia

Re: No new 17s within {-2+2}

Postby dobrichev » Wed Oct 15, 2014 5:55 am

The recent estimations for {-3,+3} search over the known 17s show that about one year is needed on a 32 core 3.2 GHz Ivy Bridge CPU.
A single thread {+3} on the alphabetically first 17-3 subgrid takes 28.327 seconds = 310 days on 32 cores. The 10 alphabetically last subgrids are processed for 335.182 seconds = 367 days on 32 cores.
This is about as twice as faster than the estimations done in the last years but twice slower than the estimation in my previous post.
dobrichev
2016 Supporter
 
Posts: 1316
Joined: 24 May 2010

Re: No new 17s within {-2+2}

Postby champagne » Wed Oct 15, 2014 7:09 am

dobrichev wrote:The recent estimations for {-3,+3} search over the known 17s show that about one year is needed on a 32 core 3.2 GHz Ivy Bridge CPU.
A single thread {+3} on the alphabetically first 17-3 subgrid takes 28.327 seconds = 310 days on 32 cores. The 10 alphabetically last subgrids are processed for 335.182 seconds = 367 days on 32 cores.
This is about as twice as faster than the estimations done in the last years but twice slower than the estimation in my previous post.

Hi Mladen,

just to catch clearly what id done
{-3,+3] means

-kill 3 clues among the 17 known
-add 3 clues taken in the 54 unknown

all that in blind mode (any combination)

is it right
champagne
2017 Supporter
 
Posts: 5742
Joined: 02 August 2007
Location: France Brittany

Re: No new 17s within {-2+2}

Postby dobrichev » Wed Oct 15, 2014 3:06 pm

Right.
dobrichev
2016 Supporter
 
Posts: 1316
Joined: 24 May 2010

{-3+3} estimations

Postby dobrichev » Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:44 am

Some {+3} timings measured on 2 x Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 0 @ 2.70GHz (Sandy Bridge, total 32 threads on 2 x 8 physical cores).

The source data are 30 302 691 essentially different 14-given subgrids at {-3} to the known 49157 17s, lexicographically ordered and partitioned to 304 chunks of size 100 000.

Chunk 000 (100 000 subgrids)
CPU time 4622958 seconds (= 54 days)
Execution time ~ 48 hours
Puzzles produced 236244
Essentially different puzzles produced 24720

Chunks 001 to 301
On hold, waiting for quantum/gravitational/other computer.

Chunk 302 (100 000 subgrids)
CPU time 4934273 seconds (= 57 days)
Execution time ~ 53 hours
Puzzles produced 131158
Essentially different puzzles produced 4310

Chunk 303 (2691 subgrids)
CPU time 145830 seconds (= 2 days)
Execution time ~ 1 hour
Puzzles produced 3434
Essentially different puzzles produced 1435

For better readability the number of new 17-clue puzzles found along with some other zeroes are not shown.
dobrichev
2016 Supporter
 
Posts: 1316
Joined: 24 May 2010

Re: No new 17s within {-2+2}

Postby champagne » Tue Oct 21, 2014 11:05 am

Hi Mladen,

I don't catch clearly what is the final goal of that process.

Is it a tentative proof that you can generate all known 17's out of the 14's patterns ?

what else ??
champagne
2017 Supporter
 
Posts: 5742
Joined: 02 August 2007
Location: France Brittany

Re: No new 17s within {-2+2}

Postby dobrichev » Wed Aug 05, 2015 7:07 pm

27.7% of {-3,+3} is done with no new 17s found.
dobrichev
2016 Supporter
 
Posts: 1316
Joined: 24 May 2010

Previous

Return to General