mark49152
Premium Member
Right, I was confusing it with just solvng the inverse scramble. Sorry.No, that's not what NISS is.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Right, I was confusing it with just solvng the inverse scramble. Sorry.No, that's not what NISS is.
I have always thought NISS was just using the inverse scramble and finding moves that are not needed and cancelling them leaving you with only the core of the solution. Thus, it would make sense that you could get a solution so different that it has a different core.
I also wasn't refering to NISS when I said it is human intellegence.. I didn't say that NISS wasn't, but I didn't say it was. Now, I will say that yes it takes a small amount of intellegence to do most anything. If one were not intellegent enough, they could not even decipher notation.
I will go analyze some NISS solves and see how it works and get back to you about how much intellegence I think it uses. I've actually learned quite a bit from you guys explaining my misconceptions. Thanks.
Step 1: Scramble the cube and try to use blockbuilding to solve as much of the cube as possible. Repeat until you find the most efficient solution that solves the most pieces.
Step 2: use insertions to solve the remaining pieces.
Step 3: repeat 1 and 2 on the inverse scramble
Have you not just described the normal way of solving a cube in less moves without the use of NISS? If all NISS is is solving the inverse of the scramble, it basically just a strategy to see if you can get a better situation to solve that will also work on the scrambled cube. If this is the case, the way everyone describes it is very misleading.
Right, in that Noah's steps 1, 2, and 3 made no mention whatever of using premoves, let alone NISS. NISS inherently makes use of the concept of premoves.Have you not just described the normal way of solving a cube in less moves without the use of NISS?
And as I said before, it's not.If all NISS is is solving the inverse of the scramble, ...
I encountered an unlucky skeleton that needs a 9-move insertion again.Here is a better solution based on your nice skeleton.hey guys, have you ever seen an optimal insertion for corners with 9 moves? here it is:
L2 F2 U2 B2 U L2 D U2 B2 U' L2 B' R' U' L2 D L' F2 L B L
L' B' L' F2 L D' L2 U R B L2 U B2 U2 D' L2 U' B2 U2 F2 L2
inv:
F‘ L‘ B2 U‘ R‘ B2 D‘ B U2 - 2x2x3 [9/9]
F‘ D2 F - F2L-1 + Pair [3/12]
L‘ F L‘ F‘ L2 D - F2L [6/18]
I was happy to find a sub20 3cycle, what you don't find that often. But on the first try I wasn't able to find even a insertion without cancellation. So I tried to do it with two insertions. But even with a first insertion with 5 move cancellation the secound one was again with just one or two moves. So I used a MGLS to finish the solution in time:
R2 U2 R D2 R‘ U2 R D2 R - 3cycle (MGLS) [9/27]
IF can't find a solution. So I did no bad work. Can anyone try to find a better solution with two insertions? I can't believe that this is the best solution for this skeleton
inverse Solution:
F‘ L‘ B2 U‘ R‘ B2 D‘ B U2 F‘ D2 F L‘ F L‘ F‘ L2 D R2 U2 R D2 R‘ U2 R D2 R
Solution:
R‘ D2 R‘ U2 R D2 R‘ U2 R2 D‘ L2 F L F‘ L F‘ D2 F U2 B‘ D B2 R U B2 L F
All but 3 corners: D' L2 F L F' L F' D2 F * U2 B' D B2 R U B2 L F
A-perm: F (U' F D2 F' U F D2 F') F'
or Insert at *: F (L2 F R2 F' L2 F R2 F') F'
FYI: The same happened several times (e.g. here and here)
My previous skeleton (link) is quite rare, truely 9-move is needed for a single insertion.
EDIT: (sorry, I didn't try two insertions)
I encountered an unlucky skeleton that needs a 9-move insertion again.
Scramble: U R2 U B2 U B2 F2 U2 R2 U' L2 B L2 U F2 D2 R' F2 R2 F' (Weekly competition 2013-13)
Too bad I'm apparantly still too loosy even for keeping the NR for my nationality.![]()
You obviously need more practice![]()
I got a 28 at Leicester Open this weekend. Like my 27 in Edinburgh a month ago, this was a fairly straightfoward solution again. When I say straightforward, I'm comparing it to some of the crazy complicated solutions I've done officially before.
27, 33, 33, 32, 29, 28, (26), 27, (DNF), 31, 27, 28 = 29.5 avg12![]()