The New Sudoku Players' Forum

by **Mike Barker** » Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:08 am

Congradulations Danny, that's one big fish. I didn't check for whales, but couldn't find any smaller fish without using a Kraken approach or grouped nice loops. I've listed a couple of the options, but I don't think they detract from your discovery.

Code: Select all: finned mutant leviathan r1589c159\r347c46b49 plus fins r18c2 and r9c3 implies r7c2<>1 . #1 . | *1 . *1 | . . . . . 1 | . . 1 | . 1 . *1 . . | 1 *1 1 | . 1 *1 ---------+----------+---------- . . 1 | . *1 . | 1 . *1 . *1 *1 | *1 . *1 | . . . *1 . 1 | . . . | 1 . . ---------+----------+---------- *1 -1 . | 1 *1 . | . 1 . . #1 . | *1 . *1 | *1 . . . . #1 | *1 . *1 | *1 *1 . 2-link Kraken Row Swordfish: r158/c246/fins=r5c3,r8c7 (r5c3-1-r6c1-8-r7c1|r9c3-1-, r8c7=8=r8c2-8-r15c2-1-): r1c246|r5c2346|r8c2467=1 => r7c2<>1 +------------------+--------------------+----------------+ | 4 128*$ 6 | 18* 5 128* | 7 3 9 | | 9 7 18 | 3 6 148 | 2 148 5 | | 128 5 3 | 14789 127 14789 | 6 148 18 | +------------------+--------------------+----------------+ | 6 4 1798 | 2 17 3 | 189 5 18 | | 5 12*$ 127# | 178* 9 178* | 3 6 4 | | 18@ 3 189 | 6 4 5 | 189 7 2 | +------------------+--------------------+----------------+ | 128@ 89-1 5 | 179 127 6 | 4 189 3 | | 7 189*$ 4 | 159* 3 19* | 158#$ 2 6 | | 3 6 12@ | 1459 8 1249 | 15 19 7 | +------------------+--------------------+----------------+ 2-link Kraken Mutant Swordfish: r568/c26b4/fins=r58c4,r68c7 (r8c4|r5c4-1-r1c4-8-r15c2-1-, r6c7-1-r6c1-8-r7c1|r9c3-1-, r8c7-1-r8c26-8-r15c2-1-): r5c2346|r6c137|r8c2467=1 => r7c2<>1 +------------------+--------------------+---------------+ | 4 128@% 6 | 18@ 5 128 | 7 3 9 | | 9 7 18 | 3 6 148 | 2 148 5 | | 128 5 3 | 14789 127 14789 | 6 148 18 | +------------------+--------------------+---------------+ | 6 4 1798 | 2 17 3 | 189 5 18 | | 5 12*@% 127* | 178# 9 178* | 3 6 4 | | 18*$ 3 189* | 6 4 5 | 189# 7 2 | +------------------+--------------------+---------------+ | 128$ 89-1 5 | 179 127 6 | 4 189 3 | | 7 189*% 4 | 159# 3 19*% | 158# 2 6 | | 3 6 12$ | 1459 8 1249 | 15 19 7 | +------------------+--------------------+---------------+ 2-link Kraken Mutant X-Wing: r56/b45/fins=r6c7 (r5c4-1-r1c4-8-r15c2-1-, r5c6-1-r8c6-9-r158c2-1-, r6c7-1-r6c1-8-r7c1|r9c3-1-): r5c2346|r6c137=1 => r7c2<>1 +------------------+--------------------+---------------+ | 4 128@$ 6 | 18@ 5 128 | 7 3 9 | | 9 7 18 | 3 6 148 | 2 148 5 | | 128 5 3 | 14789 127 14789 | 6 148 18 | +------------------+--------------------+---------------+ | 6 4 1798 | 2 17 3 | 189 5 18 | | 5 12*@$ 127* | 178* 9 178* | 3 6 4 | | 18*% 3 189* | 6 4 5 | 189# 7 2 | +------------------+--------------------+---------------+ | 128% 89-1 5 | 179 127 6 | 4 189 3 | | 7 189$ 4 | 159 3 19$ | 158 2 6 | | 3 6 12% | 1459 8 1249 | 15 19 7 | +------------------+--------------------+---------------+ 2-link Kraken ALS (r5c3-1-r2c3-8-r15c2-1-, r5c4-1-r1c4-8-r15c2-1-, r5c6-1-r8c6-9-r158c2-1-, r5c3-2-r5c2-1-): r5c346=12 => r7c2<>1 +-------------------+--------------------+---------------+ | 4 128@$% 6 | 18$ 5 128 | 7 3 9 | | 9 7 18@ | 3 6 148 | 2 148 5 | | 128 5 3 | 14789 127 14789 | 6 148 18 | +-------------------+--------------------+---------------+ | 6 4 1798 | 2 17 3 | 189 5 18 | | 5 12@$%& 127* | 178* 9 178* | 3 6 4 | | 18 3 189 | 6 4 5 | 189 7 2 | +-------------------+--------------------+---------------+ | 128 89-1 5 | 179 127 6 | 4 189 3 | | 7 189% 4 | 159 3 19% | 158 2 6 | | 3 6 12 | 1459 8 1249 | 15 19 7 | +-------------------+--------------------+---------------+ Overlap 6-element Grouped Nice Loop: ALS:r7c1|r9c3-8-r78c2=8=r1c2-8-ALS:r1c46|r3c5-7-r4c5=7=r4c3 -7-ALS:r5c23|r6c1-8-ALS:r7c1|r9c3~1~ => r78c2<>1 +--------------------+---------------------+---------------+ | 4 128* 6 | 18$ 5 128$ | 7 3 9 | | 9 7 18 | 3 6 148 | 2 148 5 | | 128 5 3 | 14789 127$ 14789 | 6 148 18 | +--------------------+---------------------+---------------+ | 6 4 1789* | 2 17* 3 | 189 5 18 | | 5 12% 127% | 178 9 178 | 3 6 4 | | 18% 3 189 | 6 4 5 | 189 7 2 | +--------------------+---------------------+---------------+ | 128& 89-1@ 5 | 179 127 6 | 4 189 3 | | 7 89-1@ 4 | 159 3 19 | 158 2 6 | | 3 6 12& | 1459 8 1249 | 15 19 7 | +--------------------+---------------------+---------------+

by **daj95376** » Fri Dec 29, 2006 3:05 am

Thanks Mike for the compliment, but I only generated puzzle B049 by accident. ronk gets all of the credit for catching the monster fish. If you want a good laugh, read my crazy idea for all three Templates eliminations. (Taken from a private message to ronk.)

Ron, Here's something to give you nightmares. The first three eliminations in puzzle #B049.
(Yes, I *borrowed* fish from your solutions!)

Code: Select all: r4c3 <> 1 Templates (A: 1) -- complex Kraken Swordfish c159\r347 r7c2 <> 1 Templates (A: 1) -- " " " " r7c8 <> 1 Templates (A: 1) -- " " " "

Code: Select all: # Swordfish => all three eliminations *--------------------------------------------------------------------* | 4 128 6 | 18 5 128 | 7 3 9 | | 9 7 18 | 3 6 148 | 2 148 5 | |*128 5 3 | 14789 *127 14789 | 6 148 *18 | |----------------------+----------------------+----------------------| | 6 4 789-1 | 2 *17 3 | 189 5 *18 | | 5 12 127 | 178 9 178 | 3 6 4 | |#18 3 189 | 6 4 5 | 189 7 2 | |----------------------+----------------------+----------------------| |*128 89-1 5 | 179 *127 6 | 4 89-1 3 | | 7 189 4 | 159 3 19 | 158 2 6 | | 3 6 12 | 1459 8 1249 | 15 19 7 | *--------------------------------------------------------------------*

The *nightmare* is getting the kraken cell to generate the eliminations. It's done in (complex) steps.

Code: Select all: # Step 1: [r6c1]=1 => [r4c3]<>1 -leaving- # # Step 2: X-Wing r15\c46 => [r7c5]=1 => [r7c2]<>1 & [r7c8]<>1 # kraken cell [r1c2]=1 => [r7c2]<>1 -leaving- # # Step 3: Sashimi Swordfish c579\r347 => [r7c8]<>1

Regards, Danny

Say, maybe we need a category beyond Kraken ... called DAJ .. for really odd-ball fish explanations!!!

by **ronk** » Fri Dec 29, 2006 3:21 pm

Am I missing a smaller fish in this mutant jellyfish :?:

Code: Select all: / . . | . . . | . . / * . . | . . . | . . * / . . | . . . | . . / * . . | . . . | . . * X * * | * * * | * * X X / / | / / / | / / X ---------+----------+---------- ---------+----------+---------- X * * | . . . | * * X X / / | . . . | / / X X * * | . . . | * * X X / / | . . . | / / X / X X | / / / | X X / *X X X | * * * | X X *X ---------+----------+---------- ---------+----------+---------- X * * | . . . | . . / X / / | . . . | . . * / X X | / / / | / / / *X X X | * * * | * * * X * * | . . . | . . / X / / | . . . | . . * Fig n: rrcc\rbbb Fig n inverse: rbbb\rrcc rrcc\cbbb transpose cbbb\rrcc transpose mutant jellyfish

Ruud, for the left illustration would you please use your program to check the remaining exclusions when making r6c8 empty plus both r6c1 and r8c7 not empty :?:

I'm expecting it'll be r45c23.

BTW is that program based on templates?

by **Ruud** » Fri Dec 29, 2006 4:39 pm

ronk wrote:Am I missing a smaller fish in this mutant jellyfish
Code: Select all
/ . . | . . . | . . / * . . | . . . | . . * / . . | . . . | . . / * . . | . . . | . . * X * * | * * * | * * X X / / | / / / | / / X ---------+----------+---------- ---------+----------+---------- X * * | . . . | * * X X / / | . . . | / / X X * * | . . . | * * X X / / | . . . | / / X / X X | / / / | X X / *X X X | * * * | X X *X ---------+----------+---------- ---------+----------+---------- X * * | . . . | . . / X / / | . . . | . . * / X X | / / / | / / / *X X X | * * * | * * * X * * | . . . | . . / X / / | . . . | . . * Fig n: rrcc\rbbb Fig n inverse: rbbb\rrcc rrcc\cbbb transpose cbbb\rrcc transpose mutant jellyfish

Ruud, for the left illustration would you please use your program to check the remaining exclusions when making r6c8 empty plus both r6c1 and r8c7 not empty I'm expecting it'll be r45c23.

BTW is that program based on templates?

Ron,

In your example, row 8 will lock candidates in box 7.

Code: Select all: / . . | . . . | . . / / . . | . . . | . . / X * * | * * * | * * X ---------+----------+---------- X * * | . . . | * * X X * * | . . . | * * X / X X | / / / | X X / ---------+----------+---------- * * * | . . . | . . / / X X | / / / | / / / * * * | . . . | . . /

With the changes as you suggested:

Code: Select all: / . . | . . . | . . / / . . | . . . | . . / X . . | . . . | . . X ---------+----------+---------- X * * | . . . | . . X X * * | . . . | . . X . X X | / / / | X / / ---------+----------+---------- X . . | . . . | . . / / X X | / / / | X / / X . . | . . . | . . /

I cannot relate this to a finned fish, but a little extended grouped coloring explains these eliminations:

Code: Select all: / . . | . . . | . . / / . . | . . . | . . / -b . . | . . . | . . B ---------+----------+---------- B * * | . . . | . . -b B * * | . . . | . . -b . A A | / / / | B / / ---------+----------+---------- -b . . | . . . | . . / / B B | / / / | -b / / -b . . | . . . | . . /

My fishing program uses templates, which are filtered on the "empty" cells.

by **ronk** » Sat Dec 30, 2006 2:35 pm

Ruud and Ocean, thanks for the feedback.

Ruud wrote:In your example, row 8 will lock candidates in box 7.

Code: Select all
/ . . | . . . | . . / / . . | . . . | . . / X * * | * * * | * * X ---------+----------+---------- X * * | . . . | * * X X * * | . . . | * * X / X X | / / / | X X / ---------+----------+---------- *X * * | . . . | . . / / X X | / / / | / / / *X * * | . . . | . . /

[edit by ronk: r79c1 were '*' only]

Had the locked candidates been a rattlesnake, I'd probably be dead.

"Extra" exclusions always seem to be an issue with degenerate (non-minimal, non-viable, composite, superimposed, remora, ???) fish. I favor continuing to show only the exclusions provided by the single-step and adding a footnote that points out the smaller fish. Then this exemplar would look something like ...

Code: Select all: / . . | . . . | . . / * . . | . . . | . . * / . . | . . . | . . / * . . | . . . | . . * X * * | * * * | * * X X / / | / / / | / / X ---------+----------+---------- ---------+----------+---------- X * * | . . . | * * X X / / | . . . | / / X X * * | . . . | * * X X / / | . . . | / / X / X X | / / / | X X / *X X X | * * * | X X *X ---------+----------+---------- ---------+----------+---------- X * * | . . . | . . / X / / | . . . | . . * / X X | / / / | / / / *X X X | * * * | * * * X * * | . . . | . . / X / / | . . . | . . * Fig n: rrcc\rbbb Fig n inverse: rbbb\rrcc rrcc\cbbb transpose cbbb\rrcc transpose mutant jellyfish Only exclusions from the single step are shown. Separately applying locked candidates and a mutant swordfish in the left and right figures, respectively, yields two additional exclusions not shown.

For the "original" (left figure), a r\b 1-fish (locked candidates) yields two exclusions which then reveals a rcc\rbb swordfish -- for a two-step approach that produces two more exclusions than the single-step rrcc\rbbb jellyfish. For the inverse, a rbb\rcc swordfish yields the same two additional exclusions which then reveals a b\r 1-fish.

Frankly, from the standpoint of an exemplar catalog these degenerate fish are a big pain in the tush. Fundamentally, they are an overlay of two or more smaller fish ... and there probably are far too many such combinations to make cataloging them all practical. Cataloging a few examples to illustrate their usefulness is the best I'm hoping for at this point.

How is a degenerate fish useful? I see them as useful when one or more fins are added ... such as in the following example where a fin makes the "opening" locked candidate r8\b7 unavailable.

Ruud wrote:
Code: Select all
/ . . | . . . | . . / / . . | . . . | . . / X . . | . . . | . . X ---------+----------+---------- X * * | . . . | . . X X * * | . . . | . . X # X X | / / / | X / / ---------+----------+---------- X . . | . . . | . . / / X X | / / / | # / / X . . | . . . | . . /

[edited by ronk to show fins]

This generalization is a kraken fish from an actual puzzle posted on the Kraken Fish thread here.

Ruud wrote:I cannot relate this to a finned fish, but a little extended grouped coloring explains these eliminations:
Code: Select all
/ . . | . . . | . . / / . . | . . . | . . / -b . . | . . . | . . B ---------+----------+---------- B * * | . . . | . . -b B * * | . . . | . . -b . A A | / / / | B / / ---------+----------+---------- -b . . | . . . | . . / / B B | / / / | -b / / -b . . | . . . | . . /

That's pretty much Greek to me and there's also a candidate in r6c1. Since exactly one candidate in c1 must be true, it sort of looks like ...

r456c1-x-r45c23,
r3c1-x-r3c9=x=r45c9-x-r6c7=x=r6c123-x-r45c23 and
r79c1-x-r8c23=x=r8c7-x-r6c7=x=r6c123-x-r45c23

... but I can't make the connection, particularly the '-b' in two different boxes of c1 and the 'A' without an 'a' anywhere. Is this notation from the Programmers' Forum?

[edit" OK, I think I see. The 'A's are a "starting point" and assumed to be false. Then coloring shows all candidates in c1 eliminated ... except for the 'B's. Cells r45c23 see all the 'A's in r6 and all the 'B's in c1 and hence candidates in r45c23 may be safely excluded.

That would seem easier to understand than kraken jellyfish.]

by **ronk** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 6:01 am

A new exemplar ... thanks to Mike Barker's post here for a wapati puzzle.

Code: Select all: . * . | . / . | . / . . / . | . * . | . * . * * * | * X * | * X * / / / | / X / | / X / . * . | . / . | . / . . / . | . * . | . * . ---------+----------+---------- ---------+----------+---------- . * . | . / . | * X * . / . | . * . | / X / / X / | / / / | X / X * X * | * * * | X *X X . * . | . / . | * X * . / . | . * . | / X / ---------+----------+---------- ---------+----------+---------- . * . | * X * | . / . . / . | / X / | . * . / X / | X / X | / / / * X * | X *X X | * * * . * . | * X * | . / . . / . | / X / | . * . Fig 4x: rrcc\rcbb Fig 4x inverse: rcbb\rrcc mutant jellyfish

Note that each illustration is a "self-transpose", i.e., has diagonal symmetry. (I plan to update the exemplar catalog soon.)

Permuting the puzzle to fit the exemplar:

Code: Select all: ..1..462.2.8..73...4.26...77....8..3..265..7..5.9..4...8...6.3...7.3...66..84.7.. After applying Simple Sudoku technique set (SSTS): 9 . . | . . . | . . 9 . . . | . *9 . | . *9 . . . 9 | . . 9 | 9 . . ---------+----------+---------- . 9 9 | . . . | 9 *9 . . *9 . | . . . | *9 . . . . . | . . . | . . . ---------+----------+---------- 9 . . | . *9 . | 9 . 9 #9 *9 . | . . *9 | . . . . -9 9 | . . 9 | . #9 9 2-finned mutant jellyfish r58c58\r2c2b68 plus fins r8c1 and r9c8, implies r9c2<>9

by **Pat** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 10:01 am

ronk (2006.Dec.28) wrote:
Pat wrote:- yes, valid with two fins;

My viewpoint is that one fin r28c6 is comprised of two fin-cells r2c6 and r8c6.
I think the criterion for one fin should be (already is ??) that one or more fin-cells share one sector.

good point, ronk, thanks for the correction.

~ Pat

by **Pat** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:25 pm

on a couple of occasions i've made comments such as --

[ assuming the usual box-size of 3x3, ]

i expect a Squirmbag is complemented by a Jellyfish ( or smaller )

Franken

Mutant

cannot

by **ronk** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:58 pm

Pat wrote:i expect a Squirmbag is complemented by a Jellyfish ( or smaller )

I think that holds for franken fish too ... but not for mutants.

by **ronk** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 3:45 pm

Here are two puzzles generated by daj95376 that have a finned mutant whale or afinned mutant squirmbag with one remote fin chained to elimination cell(s) with a strong link.

Does anyone see smaller fish :?:

Is there a fish, even a bigger sized one, that makes the same elimination(s) without the support of a remote fin :?:

Code: Select all: .3...8..4..4.7.6..6....572.....5.982.6..2..3.928.3.....756....9..6.8.3..3..5...7. #B020 1 In addition to SSTS: r6c7<>1 -- 3-finned mutant whale r37c19b35\r468c58b1 plus fins r1c7, r5c9 and remote fin r3c4 r8c2<>1 -- XYZ-Wing on r8c1 r2c4=1 -- BUG+1 All the candidates at the time of the whale: 127 3 279 | 129 6 8 | 15 159 4 128 5 4 | 1239 7 12 | 6 19 38 6 18 19 | 1349 149 5 | 7 2 38 -------------------+-------------------+------------------ 147 14 3 | 17 5 6 | 9 8 2 5 6 17 | 8 2 9 | 4 3 17 9 2 8 | 147 3 147 | 15 6 157 -------------------+-------------------+------------------ 28 7 5 | 6 14 3 | 28 14 9 124 149 6 | 12479 8 1247 | 3 145 15 3 1489 12 | 5 149 124 | 28 7 6 And looking at just the 1s; *1 . . | 1 . . | #1 *1 . *1 . . | 1 . 1 | . *1 . . *1 *1 | #1 *1 . | . . . ---------+----------+---------- *1 1 . | *1 . . | . . . . . 1 | . . . | . . #1 . . . | *1 . *1 | -1 . *1 ---------+----------+---------- . . . | . *1 . | . *1 . *1 1 . | 1 . 1 | . 1 *1 . 1 1 | . 1 1 | . . . 3-finned mutant whale r37c19b35\r468c58b1 plus fins r1c7, r5c9 and remote fin r3c4 whale r47c19b35\r468c58b1-1-r6c7 fin r1c7-1-r6c7 fin r5c9-1-r6c7 remote fin r3c4-1-r46c4=1=r6c56-1-r6c7

Code: Select all: 5.7..9.3..29.....14...5..9.1.5.63.2...........9.41.3.5.7..4...93.....64..6.5..7.3 #B132 8 In addition to SSTS: r6c13<>8 -- finned franken swordfish r2b57\c134 plus fin r6c6 r8c6<>8 -- finned x-wing in r69c68 plus fin r9c5 r13c2<>8 -- 2-finned mutant squirmbag r2c58b45\r569c2b2 plus fin r2c1 and remote fin r4c4 . 8 . | 8 8 . | 8 . 8 *8 . . | *8 . . | . . . . 8 8 | 8 . 8 | 8 . 8 ---------+----------+---------- . 8 . | *8 . . | 8 . 8 8 8 8 | *8 . . | 8 8 8 -8 . -8 | . . #8 | . 8 . ---------+----------+---------- *8 . *8 | . . . | 8 . . . . *8 | 8 . 8 | . . 8 . . . | . 8 8 | . 8 . finned franken swordfish r2b57\c134 plus fin r6c6, implies r6c13<>8 . -8 . | 8 *8 . | 8 . 8 #8 . . | *8 . . | . . . . -8 8 | 8 . 8 | 8 . 8 ---------+----------+---------- . *8 . | #8 . . | 8 . 8 *8 *8 *8 | *8 . . | 8 *8 8 *8 . *8 | . . *8 | . *8 . ---------+----------+---------- 8 . 8 | . . . | 8 . . . . 8 | 8 . . | . . 8 . . . | . *8 8 | . *8 . 2-finned mutant squirmbag r2c58b45\r569c2b2 plus fin r2c1 and remote fin r4c4 whale r2c58b45\r569c2b2-8-r13c2 fin r2c1-8-r13c2 remote fin r4c4-8-r2c4=4=r2c1-8-r13c2

by **tarek** » Thu Jan 04, 2007 3:04 pm

very interesting recent post....... I review all since my last update & update the header post.

I think that Franken fish can be subcategorised in the seperate thread which was started......

for this thread at the current moment I think kraken fish would simply be fish on life support (that need information from outside the pattern to achieve eliminations).........

does anyone have a proper definition of a SECTOR, LINE & BOX so that it can be included the head post too.

tarek

by **ronk** » Thu Jan 04, 2007 4:56 pm

tarek wrote:I think that Franken fish can be subcategorised in the seperate thread which was started......

for this thread at the current moment I think kraken fish would simply be fish on life support (that need information from outside the pattern to achieve eliminations).........

Recently Mike Barker and I again discussed the definition of kraken fish on the Kraken Fish thread. Mike strongly believes kraken fish should include deductions using more than one digit. I strongly disagree and, rather than introduce another name for fish on "life support" using single digits, I indicated "single-digit kraken fish" might be an acceptable term.

After further thought, however, "single-digit kraken fish" is just unacceptable. Why? Firstly, we have the tradition of "fish" have been single-digit creatures. Secondly, simple definitions greatly enhance understanding and communication -- particularly for those new to this hobby. The definition I'm suggesting? -- fish are single-digit constraint sets. Adding an adjective -- to get "whatever fish" -- should preferably narrow the definition, not broaden it.

So "single-digit .... fish" seems redundant and " ... kraken fish" seems oxymoronic because of Mike's position. That's why I tried out the "remote fin" terminology for fish on life support in my prior post here. This avoids the "kraken" term altogether -- at least for single-digit fish. Additionally "remote fin" is straight-forward and communicative --and "remote" is similar in meaning to usage in "remote pairs."

tarek wrote:does anyone have a proper definition of a SECTOR, LINE & BOX so that it can be included the head post too.

I suggest looking at the sudopedia site for ideas. It's probably too much to hope for, but identical definitions would be nice.

by **daj95376** » Thu Jan 04, 2007 7:52 pm

I have only a modest understanding of fish. However, I do treat them as single-digit entities and I have a term that I use in my notes whenever a cell indirectly affects eliminations in a box. I call it an 'exo cell' because it only supports the eliminations through an implication chain ... and I think of it as acting from *outside* the direct scope of influence of other cells in the fish. Of course, I don't understand mutant/franken fish, so all of what I've said could be just rubbish. Please ignore if this is the case!

by **Mike Barker** » Thu Jan 04, 2007 8:21 pm

Ron, I noted your use of remote fin and thought it very appropriate. Here's a remote fin swordfish solution to your Whale. I'll let you decide the better approach. Also there are a number of XY-wing, XYZ-wing, and ER eliminations which can be made. Should a big fish like this only be defined after simpler moves? If so, which ones?

Tarek, did you mean Franken Fish or Kraken Fish?

Code: Select all: 2-link Kraken Row Swordfish (r349) (r9c3|r4c1|r3c3-1-r5c3=1=r5c9-1-, r9c6|r9c5|r3c5-1-r7c5=1=r7c8-1-r12c8=1=r1c7-1-): r3c2345|r4c124|r9c2356=1 => r6c7<>1 +-----------------+-------------------+----------------+ | 127 3 279 | 129 6 8 | 15$ 159$ 4 | | 128 5 4 | 1239 7 12 | 6 19$ 38 | | 6 18* 19* | 1349* 149* 5 | 7 2 38 | +-----------------+-------------------+----------------+ | 147* 14* 3 | 17* 5 6 | 9 8 2 | | 5 6 17@ | 8 2 9 | 4 3 17@ | | 9 2 8 | 147 3 147 | 5-1 6 157 | +-----------------+-------------------+----------------+ | 28 7 5 | 6 14$ 3 | 28 14$ 9 | | 124 149 6 | 12479 8 1247 | 3 145 15 | | 3 1489* 12* | 5 149* 124* | 28 7 6 | +-----------------+-------------------+----------------+

by **ronk** » Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:38 pm

Mike Barker wrote:Ron, I noted your use of remote fin and thought it very appropriate.

I'm glad you think so.

Here's a remote fin swordfish solution to your Whale. I'll let you decide the better approach.

2-link Kraken Row Swordfish (r349) (r9c3|r4c1|r3c3-1-r5c3=1=r5c9-1-, r9c6|r9c5|r3c5-1-r7c5=1=r7c8-1-r12c8=1=r1c7-1-): r3c2345|r4c124|r9c2356=1 => r6c7<>1
Code: Select all
+-----------------+-------------------+----------------+ | 127 3 279 | 129 6 8 | 15$ 159$ 4 | | 128 5 4 | 1239 7 12 | 6 19$ 38 | | 6 18* 19* | 1349* 149* 5 | 7 2 38 | +-----------------+-------------------+----------------+ | 147* 14* 3 | 17* 5 6 | 9 8 2 | | 5 6 17@ | 8 2 9 | 4 3 17@ | | 9 2 8 | 147 3 147 | 5-1 6 157 | +-----------------+-------------------+----------------+ | 28 7 5 | 6 14$ 3 | 28 14$ 9 | | 124 149 6 | 12479 8 1247 | 3 145 15 | | 3 1489* 12* | 5 149* 124* | 28 7 6 | +-----------------+-------------------+----------------+

I'm lost. Looking at your expression above, it appears the blue portion (my coloring) is a "summary." If so, the portion not colored only lists six of the eleven cells in rows 3, 4 and 9. Since chains are given, you must be considering those six cells to be remote fins. But what of the other five cells? I don't even see a cover sector that reaches the exclusion cell. Please clarify.

Mike Barker wrote:Also there are a number of XY-wing, XYZ-wing, and ER eliminations which can be made. Should a big fish like this only be defined after simpler moves? If so, which ones?

I usually try to post examples that others can simply load into Simple Sudoku and "sit" on the F11 key to get to the sticking point and voilà -- there are the pencilmarks. So while there might be xyz-wing and ER exclusions at that point, there should be no xy-wings.

The New Sudoku Players' Forum

The Ultimate FISH Guide

re: fins

complementary fish

Re: complementary fish