The definition in Adrew Stuart's book is (short version):

For an UR to be an UR is has to contain at least two bivalue cells (or one naked pair). If it doesnt, the UR itself is hidden underneath the additional candidates (thus: Hidden UR). If one of the UR candidates occurs only in the UR cells in the row and col opposite to the two value cell we can eliminate the other UR candidate from the UR cell.

Can the above definition of a hidden unique rectangle be upgraded

to also cover situations like the following.

i have a grid where there is three hidden pairs of the same digits linked in a rectangle shape.

with these three corners the 4th corner can be exclued from containing the hidden pairs digits.

Indicated below.

- Code: Select all
`.-------------------.------------------.---------------------.`

| 26 1236 124 | 7 1689@ 5 | 2389 249 4-89@ |

| 2567 9 8 | 1246 16 1236 | 2357 2457 457 |

| 257 2357 2457 | 24 89@ 23 | 6 1 45789@|

:-------------------+------------------+---------------------:

| 9 2578 6 | 125 157 127 | 12578 2457 3 |

| 1 2578 257 | 3 567 4 | 25789 25679 56789 |

| 257 4 3 | 8 1567 9 | 1257 2567 567 |

:-------------------+------------------+---------------------:

| 8 567 57 | 9 2 67 | 4 3 1 |

| 3 1567 9 | 156 4 167 | 57 8 2 |

| 4 12567 1257 | 156 3 8 | 579 5679 5679 |

'-------------------'------------------'---------------------'

R13C5(89) hidden pair + R3C9(89) hidden pair + R1C9(89)

=> R1C9<>89

as well as the normal hidden eliminations

R1C5<>16, R3C9 <>457

is there a better definition for hidden rectangle or avoidable rectangle that can cover this, im looking for links etc.

or any topic in general that can cover this example

- notes: {this new deffintion should also include hidden pairs +naked pairs combinations)