What is the minimum number of algorithms needed for 2 look last layer?

Discussion in 'Puzzle Theory' started by 10461394944000, May 12, 2014.

Welcome to the Speedsolving.com. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community of over 30,000 people, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us and we'll help you get started. We look forward to seeing you on the forums!

Already a member? Login to stop seeing this message.
  1. Lars Petrus

    Lars Petrus Member

    Mar 22, 2009
    Thanks! I added those.

    That set does miss one position: http://birdflu.lar5.com/?pos=Cd4a (Setup: B' U2 B U' F' U B' U' F2 U' B U F')

    Still, that easily beats my 14 alg set by adding any alg that covers that position. The fact that I didn't have 10 of those 12 in the system shows the deficiencies in my small set search. I've mostly focused on finding fast sets, not small, and it shows.

    How did you find this one?
  2. TDM

    TDM Member

    Mar 7, 2013
    Wow. What I love about these are they're all nice cases. Most are standard COLLs/easy ZBLLs.
    It's unusual how only J93 and J417 affect EO though. Do you know which cases they help solve?

    I made a table with speed-optimal algs, though I doubt many people will be able to use it for speedsolving.
  3. Lars Petrus

    Lars Petrus Member

    Mar 22, 2009
    If I remove J93/J417, only http://birdflu.lar5.com/?pos=Fo4A becomes unsolved, so that's why it's there. Kinda silly to have EO flipping algs in an EO set, but that's what dumb software will do.

    When I made the "tiny" sets, only <= 10 moves algs were combinable, so that's why all the algs are short :)

    If you want to "upload"/play around with that 14 alg set, I'll add the missing algs.
  4. xyzzy

    xyzzy Member

    Dec 24, 2015
    I wrote a script a while back to calculate the coverage of any set and ran it for a few hours (it was really slow) on random sets of 6 cases. Strange that it missed one case though; maybe there's a bug in my code, or maybe I copied the results wrongly back when I ran it. I do have two other 6-alg sets that cover all but one case.

    Edit: Oh, actually the code was correct, but I looked up the wrong case in Birdflu. Replacing Ff4h / K1880 with Fl4F / K701 fixed it—full coverage with 12 algs!
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2017

Share This Page