enxio27 wrote:champagne wrote:...
So far, I have generated puzzles with the appropriate pattern using gsf and then rated them with Sudoku Explainer. As you and others have found, SE takes a long time, so I was hoping to either limit gsf's puzzle generation to (probable) pearls and diamonds (haven't figured out the correct command line options for that) or use something (gridchecker or skfr?) to pre-rate the puzzles to filter out all but (potential) pearls and diamonds. Then, my plan is to rate only the likely pearls/diamonds.
I'm just trying to make the process more efficient and more fruitful.
.
I answer in another thread to limit the pollution of mladen gridchecker's thread.
limit gsf's puzzle generation to (probable) pearls and diamondsthis is a kind of dream assuming that gsf's program can rate in a similar way to Sudoku Explainer. Patrice went in that direction AFAIK with an integrated version of SE working much faster, but limited to ratings around 9.2
skfr rating is acceptable, but remains slow enough to clear redundancy before the rating.
On my side I first rate "in blocks" using another clone of SE, faster but with more deviations in the high ratings (in block means that for example all xy chains are rated at the same level).
Then depending on the game status, the next steps are defined (what new vicinity step, what to rate more precisely...) using among others skfr and Finally SE
In a competitive game, batches should be relatively short, but usually, as I am not really fighting to win(usually
), I try to have long batches saving the time to spend on the game.