The SUPERIOR THREAD (Second collection)

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

Postby tarek » Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:20 pm

gsf wrote:I used these options to filter ~2M generated symmetric puzzles from last march
Code: Select all
-q'{[B+]T1H1}{[B1]BT2H2T3W2H3}-G' -e'V&&S&&I2>1'

and found 2 requiring 2 solitary non-singles moves, the first box-line, the second x-wing

I just noticed the "2M symmetric puzzles" part of your message......

This means that finding these is as hard if not more than finding a "hardest" puzzle......

I personally have nothing on the radar for the past 4 days:( ........

tarek
User avatar
tarek
 
Posts: 2611
Joined: 05 January 2006

Postby tarek » Tue Oct 09, 2007 12:22 am

2 new puzzles:
Code: Select all
010004003700900050003070000030000006004000700500000090000050800060003004900800010
 . 1 . | . . 4 | . . 3 
 7 . . | 9 . . | . 5 . 
 . . 3 | . 7 . | . . . 
-------+-------+------
 . 3 . | . . . | . . 6 
 . . 4 | . . . | 7 . . 
 5 . . | . . . | . 9 . 
-------+-------+------
 . . . | . 5 . | 8 . . 
 . 6 . | . . 3 | . . 4 
 9 . . | 8 . . | . 1 . 

600090000007008040010200500004000070800000004050000900003004080090600200000050001
 6 . . | . 9 . | . . . 
 . . 7 | . . 8 | . 4 . 
 . 1 . | 2 . . | 5 . . 
-------+-------+------
 . . 4 | . . . | . 7 . 
 8 . . | . . . | . . 4 
 . 5 . | . . . | 9 . . 
-------+-------+------
 . . 3 | . . 4 | . 8 . 
 . 9 . | 6 . . | 2 . . 
 . . . | . 5 . | . . 1 

tarek
User avatar
tarek
 
Posts: 2611
Joined: 05 January 2006

Postby tarek » Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:14 pm

5 new puzzles:
Code: Select all
5...9.....8...29....43...7...7....2.3.......9.9....8...6...72....25...3.....8...6
 5 . . | . 9 . | . . . 
 . 8 . | . . 2 | 9 . . 
 . . 4 | 3 . . | . 7 . 
-------+-------+------
 . . 7 | . . . | . 2 . 
 3 . . | . . . | . . 9 
 . 9 . | . . . | 8 . . 
-------+-------+------
 . 6 . | . . 7 | 2 . . 
 . . 2 | 5 . . | . 3 . 
 . . . | . 8 . | . . 6 

8...2.....4.6..7....2..5.3..7....8..5.......1..3....2..8.1..4....7..3.5.....6...7
 8 . . | . 2 . | . . . 
 . 4 . | 6 . . | 7 . . 
 . . 2 | . . 5 | . 3 . 
-------+-------+------
 . 7 . | . . . | 8 . . 
 5 . . | . . . | . . 1 
 . . 3 | . . . | . 2 . 
-------+-------+------
 . 8 . | 1 . . | 4 . . 
 . . 7 | . . 3 | . 5 . 
 . . . | . 6 . | . . 7 

8...3.....7...58....19...6...9....2.4.......9.5....3...3...75....62...1.....5...2
 8 . . | . 3 . | . . . 
 . 7 . | . . 5 | 8 . . 
 . . 1 | 9 . . | . 6 . 
-------+-------+------
 . . 9 | . . . | . 2 . 
 4 . . | . . . | . . 9 
 . 5 . | . . . | 3 . . 
-------+-------+------
 . 3 . | . . 7 | 5 . . 
 . . 6 | 2 . . | . 1 . 
 . . . | . 5 . | . . 2 

..4..3..5.1..6....8..7..3....5.....2.4.....1.7.....8....3..2..4....8..9.6..9..7..
 . . 4 | . . 3 | . . 5 
 . 1 . | . 6 . | . . . 
 8 . . | 7 . . | 3 . . 
-------+-------+------
 . . 5 | . . . | . . 2 
 . 4 . | . . . | . 1 . 
 7 . . | . . . | 8 . . 
-------+-------+------
 . . 3 | . . 2 | . . 4 
 . . . | . 8 . | . 9 . 
 6 . . | 9 . . | 7 . . 

8..5...9..4...1..2..3.6....9......7...1...9...6......3....3.4..7..9...8..3...6..1
 8 . . | 5 . . | . 9 . 
 . 4 . | . . 1 | . . 2 
 . . 3 | . 6 . | . . . 
-------+-------+------
 9 . . | . . . | . 7 . 
 . . 1 | . . . | 9 . . 
 . 6 . | . . . | . . 3 
-------+-------+------
 . . . | . 3 . | 4 . . 
 7 . . | 9 . . | . 8 . 
 . 3 . | . . 6 | . . 1


The 1st needs an x-wing & a hidden triple, The last needs an x-win & a hidden double

I now have several examples of 2 x-wings but very few with x-wing +hidden subset or x-wing + box-line.... none that need x-wing+naked subset:(

tarek
User avatar
tarek
 
Posts: 2611
Joined: 05 January 2006

Postby daj95376 » Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:40 pm

tarek wrote:The 1st needs an x-wing & a hidden triple, The last needs an x-win & a hidden double

I now have several examples of 2 x-wings but very few with x-wing +hidden subset or x-wing + box-line.... none that need x-wing+naked subset:(

A Naked Quad can be substituted for your Hidden Triple in the first puzzle and your Hidden Pair in the last puzzle. You now have two examples of an X-Wing + naked subsets.
daj95376
2014 Supporter
 
Posts: 2624
Joined: 15 May 2006

Postby tarek » Mon Dec 17, 2007 6:53 pm

daj95376 wrote:A Naked Quad can be substituted for your Hidden Triple in the first puzzle and your Hidden Pair in the last puzzle. You now have two examples of an X-Wing + naked subsets.

you are absolutely right daj95376....I didn't formulate my sentence correctly....

As quads are not considered "superior" techniques. Only the hidden triple & double are there (& have no counterparts under the superior techniques). I'm having problems in finding a puzzle that has a naked triple or double with an x-wing (under the strict rules of this thread:( )

tarek
User avatar
tarek
 
Posts: 2611
Joined: 05 January 2006

Postby daj95376 » Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:22 pm

tarek wrote:you are absolutely right daj95376....I didn't formulate my sentence correctly....

As quads are not considered "superior" techniques. Only the hidden triple & double are there (& have no counterparts under the superior techniques). I'm having problems in finding a puzzle that has a naked triple or double with an x-wing (under the strict rules of this thread:( )

I made a mistake by misreading the rules in your initial post to this thread. My apologies for the diversion!

[Edit: puzzle withdrawn. fails the '6' rules.]
Last edited by daj95376 on Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
daj95376
2014 Supporter
 
Posts: 2624
Joined: 15 May 2006

Postby tarek » Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:58 pm

Thanx daj95376. I will look into your entry tonight....

I've Re-written the Rules in the head post to make it (hopefully) clearer.

tarek
User avatar
tarek
 
Posts: 2611
Joined: 05 January 2006

Postby tarek » Tue Dec 18, 2007 10:08 am

you posted a puzzle to this thread, now listed "daj95376 0009" which needed a Naked triple & Box-line interaction.....

That one failed the minimality rule only. I couldn't find a puzzle with 2 non-single techniques where the X-Wing wasn't a feature.......

I actually stopped searching until you & gsf posted the puzzles that had 2 non-single techniques which prompted a harder search by me....

happy searching


tarek
User avatar
tarek
 
Posts: 2611
Joined: 05 January 2006

Postby Pat » Tue Dec 18, 2007 1:20 pm

tarek wrote:daj95376, you posted a puzzle to this thread, now listed as "daj95376 0009",
which needed a Naked triple & Box-line interaction;

that one failed the minimality rule only.



hi tarek,

i'm really, really glad to see you are retaining Superior puzzles which
don't quite meet the tougher rules for Superior 2~ Pat


tarek (edited 13 times) wrote:
This is a list (in chronological order) of Superior puzzles which
fulfill the Superior 2 requirements apart from the minimality constraint:

    gsf 0024 073905240000103000080000090931246758050000060862517934020000010000401000017302580
    daj95376 0002 004251000050000013007009004000600090002090700090008000800700600420000050000543100
    daj95376 0003 920870006014900070007000003490700000000060000000003029100000900070002150300047082
    daj95376 0009 201080070000004200060000800980140056105060402640029087009000040008400000010090708

This is a list (in chronological order) of Superior puzzles which
don't meet some other Superior 2 requirement:

    ab 0001 007050400000304000800060003760000020201000508050000097400030009000801000005070600
    ab 0002 020098000040670100000500020002000075007000600430000200060007000009053080000980050
    gsf 0001 040010005900062013000000800002003050000579000030100400004000000750280006200050040
    gsf 0002 000008000002100390005030021570000200900603008003000049240010700039002100000300000
    gsf 0003 074901380091000420000050000020395040000000000060284070000010000037000810012803750
    gsf 0006 060000002000230060800405000001950200070000040002013900000107005030042000200000010
    gsf 0007 017040600600100020030005009000590001000000000200038000300800010020004003008010740
    gsf 0008 040200000063000800508030100400600510870000032015004009002040301001000740000005080
    gsf 0009 700000004002050900800004070049300000008601500000002310030200007007040800600000001
    daj95376 0004 603091004001800690009046000028000100000000000006000920000910300012004800800350401
    ab 0003 020000500309806000600420000007210000006000100000039800000068005000103402005000060
    ab 0004 400200000000048500080001700005700940000803000092004600001500030008320000000009006
    ab 0005 000930005000200000050080600100002000080000901006400057008600000290050300070004000
    daj95376 0005 000800070820700010006009008600500100052107380003006007300900800060003092090008000
    daj95376 0006 005000072900700500020500008670800010240000056050009037800006020002007003530000700
    daj95376 0007 040705038030028051800000000000600012071050680650001000000000003460130020310502060
    daj95376 0008 095008200800400000740030096000000083010040050530000000170050024000004001004100370
    ab 0006 200380006080600090000001000003906081400000003610208700000700000060009020900052007
User avatar
Pat
 
Posts: 3423
Joined: 18 July 2005

2-level rating for the "superior" puzzles

Postby Pat » Tue May 20, 2008 1:11 pm

    we can get a 2-level rating for the "superior" puzzles
    using gsf's software
      -q{NF}{B2B3H2T2}{H3T3W2}-G -B -e(valid*I3)!=0 -f%v,%(I3)x.%(I2)x

    e.g. for the puzzle below,
    the rating is 1.3
in another Topic, ido117 (2008.May.16) wrote:

        [ 25 clues ]
Code: Select all
...1........4.3.857.....19..5.3...29....2....18...4.3..41.....262.5.7........8...


Code: Select all
 . . . | 1 . . | . . .
 . . . | 4 . 3 | . 8 5
 7 . . | . . . | 1 9 .
-------+-------+------
 . 5 . | 3 . . | . 2 9
 . . . | . 2 . | . . .
 1 8 . | . . 4 | . 3 .
-------+-------+------
 . 4 1 | . . . | . . 2
 6 2 . | 5 . 7 | . . .
 . . . | . . 8 | . . .

User avatar
Pat
 
Posts: 3423
Joined: 18 July 2005

2.4

Postby Pat » Thu May 22, 2008 9:48 am

        2.4

        24 clues
Code: Select all
.....57...2..4..1.4..2.....9...8.3...6.7.3.5...3.6...8.....8..3.1..2..6...51.....


Code: Select all
 . . . | . . 5 | 7 . .
 . 2 . | . 4 . | . 1 .
 4 . . | 2 . . | . . .
-------+-------+------
 9 . . | . 8 . | 3 . .
 . 6 . | 7 . 3 | . 5 .
 . . 3 | . 6 . | . . 8
-------+-------+------
 . . . | . . 8 | . . 3
 . 1 . | . 2 . | . 6 .
 . . 5 | 1 . . | . . .

User avatar
Pat
 
Posts: 3423
Joined: 18 July 2005

Postby tarek » Thu May 22, 2008 2:06 pm

The problem with batch rating is that it doesn't give you the full picture. It will you that "A minimum of x" will be needed but not "Exactly x will be needed".

My tweaked solver can tell you how many of each is needed... so something like this can be next to the puzzle (H3x2 T3x0 X2x1) to indicate 2 hidden triples & an x-wing. These may show up as 1.0 in the batch rating if all 3 moves can be seen in the PM grid.

The second superior collection doesn't suffer from this because the extreme strict rules makes batch solving redundant.

tarek
User avatar
tarek
 
Posts: 2611
Joined: 05 January 2006

Postby Pat » Thu May 22, 2008 2:33 pm

tarek wrote:The problem with batch rating is that it doesn't give you the full picture. It will you that "A minimum of x" will be needed but not "Exactly x will be needed".

My tweaked solver can tell you how many of each is needed... so something like this can be next to the puzzle (H3x2 T3x0 X2x1) to indicate 2 hidden triples & an x-wing. These may show up as 1.0 in the batch rating if all 3 moves can be seen in the PM grid.


hey tarek, that's wonderful news about your solver!!
could you please show what is needed (required) in the 2 examples above?
thanks!!
User avatar
Pat
 
Posts: 3423
Joined: 18 July 2005

Postby tarek » Thu May 22, 2008 3:53 pm

Pat wrote:could you please show what is needed (required) in the 2 examples above?
It has been a while since I used that version. That is why I was imagining what it can do:( .

It is actually a tweaked batch solver that attempts to tell you what tecniques are absolutely needed but then it goes to say the usual "A minimum of x is needed"

Having said that the results were:
Code: Select all
...1........4.3.857.....19..5.3...29....2....18...4.3..41.....262.5.7........8... H3x0 X2x0 T3x0
.....57...2..4..1.4..2.....9...8.3...6.7.3.5...3.6...8.....8..3.1..2..6...51..... H3x1 X2x1 T3x0


The reason why the 1st scored a 0 is that reordering your solving heirarchy would result in using a different path to solve.

I think that the -J option in gsf's solver would provide the solution. I'll look into it.

tarek
User avatar
tarek
 
Posts: 2611
Joined: 05 January 2006

Postby Pat » Thu May 22, 2008 4:24 pm

the 1st example does need a trio ( which qualifies it as "superior" )
    leaving me curious as to how much it needs of the lesser stuff ( duos, box-line interactions )

    i get a headache trying to follow all the possible solution-paths,
    was hoping for software to do that---
the 2nd example, as you noted,
needs both a trio and an X-wing
    again, i'd be curious to know what it needs of the lesser stuff
User avatar
Pat
 
Posts: 3423
Joined: 18 July 2005

PreviousNext

Return to General