David P Bird wrote:Just as I found the first of these, JCVH posted his full set of solutions, so I watched the Tour de France instead! My solution was identical to JC's and was an adaptation of the 4 box cover pattern used for SK loops.
Now I notice that each of his and your solutions includes a box cover set. This might be why Champagne & Leren couldn't identify them. The question therefore is – is it possible to get these results using only row and column cover sets?
blue wrote:I don't think it's possible without introducing box-type base sets too.
These were some odd cases, and the patterns that I posted were each "strange" in some way.
champagne wrote:I had a look to the first one and checked whether these solutions fitted with David's split "Home" "Away" which is the base of leren's lay-out.
In JC's solution, Digit 6 is both "'Home" and "Away". Enough to be out of the scope.
I just considered blue's 4 rows solution, but I guess the 5 rows would be complementary. Here, the digits 12 are both "Home" and "Away" The fact is hidden in the box cover 12b1.
No chance in both cases to catch these cells bases using the "home" "away" logic.
David P Bird wrote:Champagne, that's not so! You seem to have misidentified the sets being used.
champagne wrote:David P Bird wrote:Champagne, that's not so! You seem to have misidentified the sets being used.
I don't, but that does not mean that I am fully in line with you.
AFAIK, leren, as me, is working with "Home" in one direction and "Away" in the other.
With that specification, the process is already 10 times slower than my search on rows columns or "X" base.
Opening the specification would be a disaster in terms of run time.
*----------------------------*----------------------------*----------------------------*
23 | <9> <8> 145-2 | <7> #23 #234 | <6> #1235 #123 |
| 12345 1457 12457 | 1489 <6> 2389-4 | 13578 23789-15 23789-1 |
| 1236 167 1267 | 189 2389 <5> | 1378 <4> 23789-1 |
*----------------------------*----------------------------*----------------------------*
79 | <8> 1456-79 1456-79 | <3> #579 #4679 | <2> #1579 #1479 |
| 45 <2> 4579 | 4589 789-5 <1> | 34578 3789-5 <6> |
2789 | 1456 1456-79 <3> | 456-89 #25789 #246789 | 145-78 #15789 #14789 |
*----------------------------*----------------------------*----------------------------*
| <7> 469 2469 | 689 <1> 389-6 | 348 238 <5> |
| 125 <3> 1259 | 589 <4> 789 | 178 <6> 278-1 |
37 | 1456 1456 <8> | <2> #357 #367 | <9> #137 #1347 |
*----------------------------*----------------------------*----------------------------*
5 46 15 14
*9 8 *124 | 7 *1236 1346 |*1235 *125 345
6 1234 1247 | 2348 5 134 | 9 1278 3478
12347 1234 5 | 23489 1238 1349 | 12378 6 3478
----------------------+----------------------+---------------------
5 129 1289 | 689 4 1679 | 2678 3 6789
*348 7 *489 | 35689 *368 2 |*568 *589 1
1238 1239 6 | 3589 1378 13579 | 4 25789 5789
----------------------+----------------------+---------------------
1278 1256 3 | 256 9 567 | 15678 4 5678
*478 4569 *4789 | 1 *367 34567 |*35678 *5789 2
*1247 124569 *12479 | 23456 *2367 8 |*13567 *1579 35679
pjb wrote:
I apologize if I'm missing something obvious, but I've run into a few of these grids where there is one given, and thus one less cell truth, in this case 19. The link set as described by Leren above has in the column with the given (at r1c1) the inclusion of a number that appears only once. In the example above we have 34c1, but only one 3 in r2c1. My problem is don't you need a number occurring in two cell truths to form a link? I assume there is an answer since the eliminations in this situation are always OK.
Phil