Sudoku Players' Forum (clone)

daj, Ronk, Pat
After reading all your contributions, I must agree with you that memory can just about be called a net : the simplest form of net life possible, with secondary implication stream(s) of one link only (ie "seeing".
Amoeba-nets

daj95376 wrote:I've been banging heads with Asellus in the DailySudoku forum over his insisting that AICs contained initial and trailer weak links. Damn!

Personally, I prefer the addition of those weak links. I often use a simple editor script to convert a series of AICs from AIC notation to NL notation. The first thing I have to do is manually add those weak links.

ronk wrote:

daj95376 wrote:I've been banging heads with Asellus in the DailySudoku forum over his insisting that AICs contained initial and trailer weak links. Damn!

Personally, I prefer the addition of those weak links. I often use a simple editor script to convert a series of AICs from AIC notation to NL notation. The first thing I have to do is manually add those weak links.

This thread has taken many tangents. I hope it can handle one more.

Ron: How would you convert this XY-Chain from Eureka AIC into NL notation?

Code: Select all

 (2=4)a - (4=1)b - (1=9)c - (9=1)d - (1=2)e => [r1c46],[r2c8]<>2
 +--------------------------------------------------------------+
 |  147   3    b14    |  18-2  9     178-2 |  5    a24    6     |
 |  1479  1459  6     | e12    45    127   |  8     4-2   3     |
 |  2     45    8     |  36    36    45    |  7     9     1     |
 |--------------------+--------------------+--------------------|
 |  1489  189   7     |  689   46    489   |  3     5     2     |
 |  349   249   5     |  239   1     249   |  6     7     8     |
 |  38    6     23    |  7     35    258   |  4     1     9     |
 |--------------------+--------------------+--------------------|
 |  138   128   1239  |  4     7     6     |  19    38    5     |
 |  5     7    c19    | d19    8     3     |  2     6     4     |
 |  6     48    34    |  5     2     19    |  19    38    7     |
 +--------------------------------------------------------------+
 # 63 eliminations remain


daj95376 wrote:Ron: How would you convert this XY-Chain from Eureka AIC into NL notation?

(2=4)a - (4=1)b - (1=9)c - (9=1)d - (1=2)e => [r1c46],[r2c8]<>2

(r1c46, r2c8) -2- r1c8 -4- r1c3 -1- r8c3 -9- r8c4 -1- r2c4 -2- (r1c46, r2c8)

The "(r1c46, r2c8)" is merely a list of cells with actual eliminations. It could also be potential eliminations, as in "(r1c456, r2c789)".

ronk wrote:

daj95376 wrote:Ron: How would you convert this XY-Chain from Eureka AIC into NL notation?

(2=4)a - (4=1)b - (1=9)c - (9=1)d - (1=2)e => [r1c46],[r2c8]<>2

(r1c46, r2c8) -2- r1c8 -4- r1c3 -1- r8c3 -9- r8c4 -1- r2c4 -2- (r1c46, r2c8)

The "(r1c46, r2c8)" is merely a list of cells with actual eliminations. It could also be potential eliminations, as in "(r1c456, r2c789)".

Thanks Ron. That's what I was expecting, but I wanted to be sure.

DonM wrote:In addition to the above & Eureka being an alleged den of squabbling, I have it on good authority that it is responsible for Jimmy Hoffa's disappearance!

You seem to imply that since the latter is obviously false, the former is/was false too. Nice try, but that seems to be an example of the logical fallacy known as false analogy.

ronk wrote:

daj95376 wrote:Ron: How would you convert this XY-Chain from Eureka AIC into NL notation?

(2=4)a - (4=1)b - (1=9)c - (9=1)d - (1=2)e => [r1c46],[r2c8]<>2

(r1c46, r2c8) -2- r1c8 -4- r1c3 -1- r8c3 -9- r8c4 -1- r2c4 -2- (r1c46, r2c8)

The "(r1c46, r2c8)" is merely a list of cells with actual eliminations. It could also be potential eliminations, as in "(r1c456, r2c789)".

Just to include my viewpoint (using MJ's old AIC definition):

Code: Select all

2- r1c8 -4- r1c3 -1- r8c3 -9- r8c4 -1- r2c4 -2 => (r1c46,r2c8)<>2


I like the idea of placing a list of cells in parentheses!

ronk wrote:

DonM wrote:In addition to the above & Eureka being an alleged den of squabbling, I have it on good authority that it is responsible for Jimmy Hoffa's disappearance!

You seem to imply that since the latter is obviously false, the former is/was false too. Nice try, but that seems to be an example of the logical fallacy known as false analogy.

To all: Sorry for the off-topic- will cease & desist after this post.

All I want to say on this subject is that what I choose to remember about Eureka were the good things. The conversations with Re'born, Steve K, Myth, Mike B, David B, yourself, and a few others in the various challenge threads. They were like no other elsewhere at the time. Also, the subject of complete solving of advanced puzzles was promoted there, particularly in the form of Steve's original ideas, in a way not seen anywhere else and is something I continue to benefit from. (All of this somewhat after a likewise particularly great period of discussion & innovation at Player's.) That's what I want people to know about Eureka.