[Help Thread] CPLS and 2GLL discussion

[JeffDelucia]

Do you know how the probability of skips of "D" compare to CLS PLL? I know you said 2Gen CPLS is 1/3 but whats the probability of skipping right over it and jumping into 2GLL? Also do you know the probability of a CLS skip?

 

[StachuK1992]

CLS skip: 1/405
PLL skip: 1/72

CPLS skip: 1/(6*6)?
2GLL skip: 1/(8*12)?

Sorry if these are really wrong.

 

[Baian Liu]

CLS skip: 1/405
PLL skip: 1/72

CPLS skip: 1/(6*6)?
2GLL skip: 1/(8*12)?

Sorry if these are really wrong.

CPLS: 1/90
2GLL: 1/324

 

[StachuK1992]

Thanks.
6*(3*5) and 12*(3^3)?

 

[Baian Liu]

Thanks.
6*(3*5) and 12*(3^3)?

You're welcome.
And yes.

 

[Cyrus C.]

Sorry about that. I was just guessing how long the CLS algs were, remembered seeing a post or something by Lucas saying they were 9.5 moves, didn't realize the 9.5 movers weren't 2gen.

 

[RyanReese09]

so who all is goign to/started learning? some algs i found in the cpls aren't wrong (or i just fail at executing (probable)) so I started with 2gll. know 2 so far. so far they are sune variants which i

recognition is zomgwtf ez. literally just recognize if it's sune/Pi etc (easy) and then the edge cycle. Very easy. and very sexy 2gen

thanks for this statue!

 

[StachuK1992]

I've already learned the +/-/O CPLS cases.
I'll be doing 2GLL seriously soon.

Furthermore, I'll repost what I just commented on Ryan's status that is relevant:
This concerns a method which Cyrus and I have been developing, which we are naming 'Seth' and 'Leslie.'

My most recent version of what we're working on something goes like this:

F2L-1 slot just like usual.

Put DFR and FR in place intuitively, but not necessarily oriented. This should actually be done during other F2L cases.

Reduce the cube into a 2GLL state by oriented FR, LL edges, and DFR all at the same time as doing CPLL.
This is 81 algs, and is essentially CPLS of I/Im cases while doing EP.

Then just do 2GLL with one of 84 algs.

This is compared to last night's post:

Alright, this is statue's and cyrus' Seth/Leslie method idea for LS+LL


It'd be like this:

Put DFR and FR in place, not needed to be oriented
They don't necessarily have to be oriented
This should be done intuitively.

Do CPLL (6 cases) and ELS (6 cases) at the same time.
We're calling this "Seth," because I like the name Seth.
This is 27 algs when reduced, and they've already been found and documented as of yesterday.

Finish with a 2gen alg.
Yes, *all* of the rest; EPLL and orientation of the 5 corners.
This is something like 3*12*8 algs, so 288 upper limit.
We're calling this Leslie, because it has two Ls in it, like LL, and also Es, like *E*PLL. Lul.

This method all together is some 314 algs.


The last step of this can be a ***** to recog, and has a lot of algs, so I thought of this while just finishing my calc test:

During Seth, also do EPLL of ONE edge. (Not sure which yet, but I want to say UF for a reason I'll get into some other time.)
So 6*6*4 upper limit. A 6 for ELS, a 6 for CP (diag left, right, back, or front. opp. done), and a 4 for the EP case (the edge has to be in one of the four edge places (UF, UB, UL, UR))
144 cases, but makes the next step less algs and easy to recognize.

So, now for the remaining.
Rather than the 288 that came from 3*12*8,
we now have 3*4*8 that comes from
3 being the DFR orientation (I/Im/C)
4 being the EPLL cases (U, U, Done)
8 from the OCLL cases (there are 8 in each I/Im/C sect)

giving us a total of 96 algs for this step,

and a total of 240 algs for the entire method.
This is 74 algs less than the previously mentioned method.

Thoughts?

By an hour later, I had realized that the latter idea above was mis-counted, so crossed that out because it was a heftier number of algs.


All in all, I think that the method described in the first quote in this post is the most promising and realistic; an alg count with an upper limit of 165, and feasible recognition. The FR+DFR placement can *easily* be done during the other three pairs without much chaos. Otherwise, I'd cross this idea right off the bat at that point.

I'd like to see this work out. Knowing that the method ends up with 2GLL and that the pre-2GLL recognition system is very easy (compared to CPLS' slightly hectic system) I believe this to possibly a better alternative.

Again, I ask:
Thoughts?

-statue

 

[riffz]

Sounds pretty neat. How are the algs for the CP step?

 

[StachuK1992]

Sounds pretty neat. How are the algs for the CP step?

Hrm, you mean the CP+DFR CO+ELS all at once step?
I'm not sure. Still developing.

I have a third of them done so far.

Gimme a day, still gotta make a site for sortega stuff that I promised.

 

[Cyrus C.]

Seth and Leslie make a cute couple.

 

[Truncator]

This sounds tempting, however I'm confused about CPLS recognition

 

[StachuK1992]

Well, with this new thing, CPLS recog won't be needed.
Very large reason why I'm liking it so much.

 

[Truncator]

I feel like learning something like this...

I'm not sure if it's worth it for me, though.

 

[StachuK1992]

I feel like learning something like this...

I'm not sure if it's worth it for me, though.

Why? At the very least, I doubt it would hurt your solving (taken that you don't spend /all/ of your time doing it.


I'm a third way through a new doc with full Seth.
That shall be coming before too long.

 

[oll+phase+sync]

My most recent version of what we're working on something goes like this:

F2L-1 slot just like usual.

Put DFR and FR in place intuitively, but not necessarily oriented. This should actually be done during other F2L cases.

Reduce the cube into a 2GLL state by oriented FR, LL edges, and DFR all at the same time as doing CPLL.
This is 81 algs, and is essentially CPLS of I/Im cases while doing EP.

Then just do 2GLL with one of 84 algs.

Up to now I didn't realize that Petrus Step6+7 is 2Gen and has this Synonym. But I'm surprised that EO (?) / CP (3cases) / LS (?) alltogether are just 81 algs, but even that is quit a lot.

As I mentioned in another Thread if you connect the 4th CE-Pair in U there are only 6 CP cases (similar to winter variation ) ... a yes EO must be done intuitivly by the way ...

It's may be woth it to learn 6 more cases where the C of the CE-Pair is next to an missoriented edge because this is not so intuitively solvable (U'R'FRF' , ... ) or may be delve into the RUR' cases (again just 6 additional algs)


There is another 6 that's in my mind: if all edges are oriented and FR is placed and DFR is placed but misorineted -- most likely you have learned these already.

 

[EricReese]

I want to start this..but i think it might be a little too advanced for me..

 

[StachuK1992]

I want to start this..but i think it might be a little too advanced for me..

Don't bother unless you use ZZ or Petrus, you OH a decent amount, or you can do EOLL during F2L.

 

[Baian Liu]

EOCPLL (ignoring CO and EP) takes ~9.21 moves on average, which I believe is slightly less than CPLS, and uses 15 algorithms, which is mostly OLL algorithms. I think F2L+EOCPLL+2GLL has potential to be as good as F2L&EO-1C+CPLS+2GLL.

 

[Diniz]

EOCPLL (ignoring CO and EP) takes ~9.21 moves on average, which I believe is slightly less than CPLS, and uses 15 algorithms, which is mostly OLL algorithms. I think F2L+EOCPLL+2GLL has potential to be as good as F2L&EO-1C+CPLS+2GLL.

I didnt understand what EOCPLL does.. If you are just permuting the corners should be only 2 algorithms, and with less move count.