mersenneforum.org February 2020
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 2020-02-13, 07:47 #12 Dieter   Oct 2017 8010 Posts You are right, but it is notable that the one who has the bonus always is a fast solver, often with *. Either luck or many threads? Or there is a clue?
 2020-02-15, 03:24 #13 LaurV Romulan Interpreter     Jun 2011 Thailand 863510 Posts We are, for sure, missing something here. We played with this for a couple of hours this wonderful Saturday morning, in front of a mug with coffee, but we can't get close to any number you guys talk about... We think that our understanding of the puzzle is probably wrong. Giving up (for now), and moving to do some real work. Good luck to all who are stubborn enough to hunt for solutions and stars! Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2020-02-15 at 03:25
2020-02-19, 07:50   #14
Dieter

Oct 2017

24·5 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by yae9911 Thanks! Well then I don't have to worry about it anymore. I got both with the random simulation, with which I can recalculate the original game quite accurately, and with an exact calculation the approx. 33.333 ... The exact result should be Code: 77793808048991155069512637767746406705805011749411165293240199952210986407 / 2333814241469732031952625840042216151324387397379954245052697639351484416 = 33.33333333333337075608827723...
Just for fun and comparison: Do you have more digits after the point? I have computed the case without ladders and snakes using octuple-precision floats (256 bit).
You have:

33.33333333333337075608827723...

My digits:

33,33333333333337075608827723077517516365419018158718837413...

(Auf die schriftliche Division mit Papier und Bleistift kann ich verzichten!)

2020-02-19, 09:41   #15
Flow

Apr 2014

78 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by SmartMersenne There are ~10020 possible combinations. It is like the puzzle-master is saying "I have a combination in mind, can you find it?" There doesn't seem to be any clue as to how to find it. And we all have been trying for the last 2 weeks to find it by random search. Good luck!
Except that the exponential number of solutions is not a proof of complexity.

@Deiter 256 decimals
33.3333333333333707560882772307751751636541901815871883741305500801482\
1204666202969926958266548184843891480339338552289078348822180513075920\
6678407482876919981059403231292325465970228085296008800508876654103495\
45028425962346565458075668868724379723599923411

2020-02-19, 22:21   #16
SmartMersenne

Sep 2017

23×32 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Flow Except that the exponential number of solutions is not a proof of complexity. @Deiter 256 decimals 33.3333333333333707560882772307751751636541901815871883741305500801482\ 1204666202969926958266548184843891480339338552289078348822180513075920\ 6678407482876919981059403231292325465970228085296008800508876654103495\ 45028425962346565458075668868724379723599923411
It is not complex, actually, it is pretty simple:

1) generate a random configuration
2) Test it
3) If no solution found go to 1

Unfortunately, the solution space is extremely sparse, which makes it challenging to find the right configuration.

2020-02-21, 10:03   #17
Dieter

Oct 2017

24×5 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Flow Except that the exponential number of solutions is not a proof of complexity. @Deiter 256 decimals 33.3333333333333707560882772307751751636541901815871883741305500801482\ 1204666202969926958266548184843891480339338552289078348822180513075920\ 6678407482876919981059403231292325465970228085296008800508876654103495\ 45028425962346565458075668868724379723599923411
Thank you! My first 67 digits after the point are the same - applying the formulas of Althoen etc. using 256 bit floats I cannot demand more.
Where do your digits come from? Have you calculated the fraction of yae9911 or have you used the formulas of Althoen etc. for the empty board?

Apart from that I get many solutions with error<5*10**(-7) and some solutions with ...*10**(-8) or ...*10**(-9).
My best combination yields 66,978705007997 (error = 4,42*10*(-10)).
Unfortunately this combination doesnât help at all to find better solutions.

2020-02-22, 11:59   #18
yae9911

"Hugo"
Jul 2019
Germany

31 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by SmartMersenne It is not complex, actually, it is pretty simple: 1) generate a random configuration 2) Test it 3) If no solution found go to 1 Unfortunately, the solution space is extremely sparse, which makes it challenging to find the right configuration.
There are much better methods than random search. You can e.g. use the available 10 shortcut steps hierarchically. Part of it to roughly set the desired game length (Hint: Use feedback loops with overlapping snakes) and the remaining very short steps (e.g. of length +-1) to fine-tune the game length. It is easy to try that changing the starting positions of the short steps with a frozen length is enough to change the game's duration slightly.

2020-02-24, 07:46   #19
Dieter

Oct 2017

24×5 Posts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by yae9911 There are much better methods than random search. You can e.g. use the available 10 shortcut steps hierarchically. Part of it to roughly set the desired game length (Hint: Use feedback loops with overlapping snakes) and the remaining very short steps (e.g. of length +-1) to fine-tune the game length. It is easy to try that changing the starting positions of the short steps with a frozen length is enough to change the game's duration slightly.
My best configuration contains the pair [26,25]. If I change the position with frozen length I get:

[25,24] 42,265...
[26,25] 66,978705008 (error = 4,42*10**(-10))
[27,26] 66,98667..... (error = 8*10**(-3))

That are jumps, no fine-tuning is possible.

What is your best value gotten by fine-tuning?

 2020-03-03, 12:15 #20 Xyzzy     "Mike" Aug 2002 23·331 Posts
 2020-03-04, 07:55 #21 LaurV Romulan Interpreter     Jun 2011 Thailand 5·11·157 Posts Nice, hehe... Congrats to the winners! We like the idea of halving the search space...

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Xyzzy Puzzles 17 2019-03-07 21:05 Xyzzy Puzzles 27 2018-03-08 06:31 R. Gerbicz Puzzles 1 2017-03-02 23:13 Xyzzy Puzzles 1 2016-03-07 02:48 Xyzzy Puzzles 1 2015-03-02 19:01

All times are UTC. The time now is 05:30.

Thu Aug 13 05:30:08 UTC 2020 up 2:05, 0 users, load averages: 0.81, 0.96, 1.10