Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19

Thread: Commutator notation extension - [A,B,C]

  1. #1
    Colourful Kirjava's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    WCA Profile
    2006BARL01
    YouTube
    snkenjoi
    Posts
    6,037

    Default Commutator notation extension - [A,B,C]

    While some extensions to the notation have been proposed in the past, this is a common group of algorithms and the notation is already somewhat being used.

    I propose that [A,B,C] = [A,B] [B,C].

    After expanding, a cancellation in the middle gives A B A' C B' C'.

    For example, [l', RUR'U', r] is a common 4x4x4 last layer algorithm.

    This notation can be extended further -

    [A,B,C,D] = [A,B] [B,C] [C,D] = A B A' C B' D C' D'

    but I am yet to find a use for it :)

    Finally, just as [A,B]' = [B,A], [A,B,C]' = [C,B,A].

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Ponyville
    WCA Profile
    2009WHIT01
    YouTube
    ben1996123
    Posts
    4,977

    Default

    Nice, this will make it easier to write some stuff (probably, I don't know much about commutators).

    It reminds me of the chain rule.

  3. #3
    Member riffz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Toronto (Canada)
    WCA Profile
    2009HOLT01
    YouTube
    riffz
    Posts
    2,067

    Default

    I like it. Probably wouldn't use it too often but being able to avoid typing out an entire cyclic shift is good enough for me

    [F R', U2, R' F]
    Average of 12/Official: 14.43/15.17 --- BLD PB/Official: 53.31/1:23.18
    Changing username to RobHolt shortly. Remember me!

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by riffz View Post
    I like it. Probably wouldn't use it too often but being able to avoid typing out an entire cyclic shift is good enough for me

    [F R', U2, R' F]
    Ooh, that is a good use for this. I never thought of it before. I've only used it for 2*3 cycles and 5 cycles
    i don't cube any more

  5. #5
    Colourful Kirjava's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    WCA Profile
    2006BARL01
    YouTube
    snkenjoi
    Posts
    6,037

    Default

    btw

    [R, U, U2, R]

  6. #6
    Member cmowla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    YouTube
    4EverTrying
    Posts
    499

    Default

    I haven't seen that many algorithms that contain a product of two (or more) non-conjugated (or non shifted) commutators. Moreover, I have seen that algorithms for 2 3-cycle cases are just as brief (or even briefer) if handled with one commutator instead of 2. I think it would be much more useful to establish a notation extension that illustrates cyclic shifts rather than a product of two commutators.

  7. #7
    Member MostEd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    St. Petersburg Russia
    WCA Profile
    2012BETA01
    YouTube
    MostED13
    Posts
    423

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirjava View Post
    btw

    [R, U, U2, R]
    I though it was super duper complex!
    |2x2: 1.55 |3x3:8.60 |4x4:39.хх |5x5: 1:04.xx |6x6:2:00.xx |3:57.xx |
    <Kirjava> I did E2ME2M' in 0.566 in a solve :D

  8. #8
    Colourful Kirjava's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    WCA Profile
    2006BARL01
    YouTube
    snkenjoi
    Posts
    6,037

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cmowla View Post
    I haven't seen that many algorithms that contain a product of two (or more) non-conjugated (or non shifted) commutators.
    Are you sure? K4 makes heavy use of them.

    Quote Originally Posted by cmowla View Post
    Moreover, I have seen that algorithms for 2 3-cycle cases are just as brief (or even briefer) if handled with one commutator instead of 2.
    Readability > conciseness.

    Quote Originally Posted by cmowla View Post
    I think it would be much more useful to establish a notation extension that illustrates cyclic shifts rather than a product of two commutators.
    I mentioned this yesterday, but didn't see much use in it. Can you elaborate?

    Do you have anything in mind? I think a single delimiter to denote the location of the shift could be a solution.

  9. #9
    Member cmowla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    YouTube
    4EverTrying
    Posts
    499

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirjava View Post
    I mentioned this yesterday, but didn't see much use in it. Can you elaborate?
    Well, the only real use I would see is showing the decomposition of an algorithm more effectively (even permutation or odd permutation). (Sure there are most likely move cancellations with these, but is it not so with the product of commutators? If the two commutators affect only one piece type each and there are no move cancellations between them, then they should be seen as two different algorithms, not one. Of course, I'm not saying you ever said this, but just for sake of argument).

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirjava View Post
    Do you have anything in mind? I think a single delimiter to denote the location of the shift could be a solution.
    I think a single delimiter is great too. No I don't have anything in mind to suggest, because honestly, I can't recall a single time when my suggestions were considered. I just like to post my opinion which usually gives people in the thread something to oppose...in doing so, "the people find direction." If you all do decide to do this (which I highly doubt, because the notations which are currently standard "shall not be modified" ), then I'm sure you all will agree on some symbol to use as a delimiter (I'm not going to waste my time...again).

  10. #10
    Colourful Kirjava's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    WCA Profile
    2006BARL01
    YouTube
    snkenjoi
    Posts
    6,037

    Default

    When you intend to use it, just write that "|" (or whatever) denotes a cyclic shift. Maybe it'll catch on.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •