• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 30,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

4x4 Linear Fewest Moves Challenge

Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
3,809
Likes
32
Location
West Chester, PA
WCA
2008KORI02
YouTube
StachuK1992
Thread starter #1
I'm not actually interested in FMC for big cubes; I am making this thread with the hope that it will encourage users to create new, good big cube methods.

I simply don't think we have near-perfect big cube methods.

Rules:
-Don't take more than 20 minutes. There's no need for this to take longer, because it should be done linearly.
-I don't care what (Sign/WCA) notation you use; they're both fairly universal as far as I'm concerned.
If you don't specify, I'm assuming that r=slice, R=outer, Rw=fat/wide turn.
-200 moves max. Slice+wide turn metric. ;)
(r2 = 1 move, as does R and Rw)

Have fun. Be creative ;D

statue


(Yes, I know that FMC tactics might not be the best for speedsolving methods. That's why I'm making you do it linear. Hehe)
 

Mike Hughey

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
9,617
Likes
1,571
Location
Indianapolis
WCA
2007HUGH01
YouTube
MikeHughey1
#6
Restricting to under 20 minutes might affect how practical it is to figure out a parity skip. (I know Chris Hardwick had some good ideas of how this might be achieved with a linear solve.) Give us an hour instead of 20 minutes, and I suspect it's very likely someone can come up with a consistent method for parity skip, but at 20 minutes, the time might be too tight to do all the counting that might be necessary.
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
3,809
Likes
32
Location
West Chester, PA
WCA
2008KORI02
YouTube
StachuK1992
Thread starter #7
Good! I don't want you to develop a way to detect parity skip! ;)
I want the methods to be able to eventually used for regular solving. Too much time gives you too many impossible options that you couldn't take in a real solve.
 

Kirjava

Colourful
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
6,122
Likes
47
WCA
2006BARL01
YouTube
snkenjoi
#10
Give us an hour instead of 20 minutes, and I suspect it's very likely someone can come up with a consistent method for parity skip, but at 20 minutes, the time might be too tight to do all the counting that might be necessary.
Are you kidding? It's possible to completely avoid parity in normal speedsolves.
 

cmhardw

Premium Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
4,105
Likes
131
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
WCA
2003HARD01
#15
No need to look at the scramble - edge cycles can be traced in ~10 seconds.
I tried very hard to do this a few years back and could occasionally detect parity in under 15 seconds, but I usually averaged near 25-30 seconds. I did not trace the cycles of all 24 wings. I traced out the arrangement of always 12 cycles (with or without parity basically) it would take to reduce to a scrambled 3x3x3 with oriented edges.

If you have ideas on how to do the tracing in ~10 seconds I would be extremely interested in talking more with you! I've only managed to do this in under 15 seconds less than 10 times.

One anticipatory comment, if you do trace all 24 wings, then how do you handle cases such as where you have accounted for 20 pieces and are left with 4 remaining pieces (you know that none are solved)? It can sometimes take approximately 4-5 seconds just to locate one of those 4 pieces, let alone the cyclic structure of all 4.

It's not that I don't believe you, it's more that I'm completely at a loss for what your method would be! I would be very interested in taking this conversation to PM as well, since it is completely irrelevant to this thread (according to Statue's request).
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
2,068
Likes
4
Location
Toronto (Canada)
WCA
2009HOLT01
YouTube
riffz
#16
I think he underestimated how long it takes to trace them, but his point was that given 20 minutes you can determine parity from the start relatively quickly without looking at the scramble.

Amiright?
 

Kirjava

Colourful
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
6,122
Likes
47
WCA
2006BARL01
YouTube
snkenjoi
#17
Not at all. I know of at least one person who can do it in under 15 seconds on average.

I'll PM you my ideas when I get home. I'll also do an FMC solve - I have some ideas for lowering movecounts.
 
Top