5x5x5 Move Count

[pjk]

Centers: 85 Edges: 112
Centers: 69 Edges: 100
Centers: 64 Edges: 102
Centers: 77 Edges: 114
Centers: 74 Edges: 107
------------------------
Avg: Centers: 73 Edges: 107

I need to work on it. Out of all of those, I think the one with the most moves would have been the fastest solve. I do F R' F' R a lot to insert an edge from the UF spot into the RF spot, which is quick, yet long.

I am curious about the move counts on the 4x4 now.... you guys should post your 4x4 move counts for centers and edges.

 

[Mike Hughey]

4x4x4:
Centers: 28, 25, 33, (22), (35) = 28.7
Edges: 38, 47, (36), (50), 39 = 41.3

I have a feeling I'm significantly less efficient at 4x4x4, since I pretty much only do it for the weekly competitions.

 

[Dene]

Alright, time for the master. I'll only do 1.

Centers: 83
Edges: 154


How did I hit sub 4?

LMAO, funny one .

I'll try this soon. I have a feeling my move counts will be similar to yours, Hadley >.< (I average sub3, btw).

EDIT:
Centers: 63
Edges: 82
Solve was 4:08.20 in the end.
I can't confirm those numbers, but I think that is around about what they were.
Better than I expected, although this is definitely not representative of my typical solve.

My centers were only a few seconds slower than in a normal solve, although I did to them quite well compared to what I normally do and there were quite easy cases throughout. Thus I would suggest my usual range for move count to be 55-80, with probably closer to 70 on average.

For edges they went quite well although nothing out of the ordinary for the first 8. The last 4 edges were very easy and I would say normally there are +20 moves on top of that. Also, I did 1 slice move that I only counted as 1 move.

Otherwise, I did better than expected. I must just be straight up slow.
Damn.

 

[Lucas Garron]

4x4x4:
Centers: 28, 25, 33, (22), (35) = 28.7
Edges: 38, 47, (36), (50), 39 = 41.3

Somewhat FMC, but using exactly the same system I use for speed:

25, 24, 23, (21), (26) > 24
32, 34, 34, (35), (22) > 33.3

 

[Lucas Garron]

First try on 5x5x5:

62 centers, 48.31
74 edges, 1:02.69
56 3x3x3 (bad end), 31.64

2469 centers, AvG edges.

The times are high because I'm counting moves, but that was a perfectly normal 5x5x5 solve.

EDIT:
2nd try:
59 centers, 38.94
82 edges (parity), 1:20.50
54 33x3, 32.07

 

[jazzthief81]

This is my result for 10 cubes using tredges, with the averages in between brackets:

Center 1: 13 14 16 11 9 12 10 14 15 19 (13.3)
Center 2: 17 14 20 19 16 18 12 14 21 18 (16.9)
Center 3: 15 11 12 10 12 10 13 14 13 16 (12.6)
Center 4: 15 14 18 17 16 10 14 11 15 16 (14.6)
Center 5+6: 11 9 15 11 16 12 11 11 14 13 (12.3)
All Centers: 71 62 81 68 69 62 60 64 78 82 (69.7)
Tredges 1-4: 28 26 27 23 29 24 35 28 26 21 (26.7)
Tredges 5-8: 29 27 30 24 24 29 23 29 27 29 (27.1)
Tredges 9-12:24 22 18 21 30 21 32 32 32 25 (25.7)
All tredges: 81 75 75 68 83 74 90 89 85 75 (79.5)

 

[rachmaninovian]

i remember doing move counts last time. mostly below 300, ranging from 270 to 310. direct solving isn't that consistent.

 

[FrankMorris]

Here is the really old move count of mine that Ron was talking about. I have no clue where I am at now. Hope it helps. BTW, what did you mean by my move count being negative Jason?

Centers: 69, 72, 65, 74, 66=69.2
Edges: 91, 81, 79, 83, 79=82.6

 

[UMichSpeedCubist]

I specialize in reducing turn-count for 5x5 (as opposed to reducing my times apparently) and did two attempts just now. I got parity on both, but since I can't do the alg slow enough to keep count I will list the result before executing parity, but setup for the parity alg.

I got 54/63 on my first one, and 60/65 on the second. But I was extra careful during edges.

 

[Mike Hughey]

BTW, what did you mean by my move count being negative Jason?

Don't tell me you haven't seen this?
http://cube.garron.us/misc/frank_morris.htm

Obviously it's another fact that just belongs in there.

 

[FrankMorris]

Wow, I had not seen that. I have been out of the loop lately. Perhaps I should pay better attention.

This came at a perfect time. I really need something to smile at in life. Thanks guys.

 

[RobinBloehm]

What is your way to count your moves, do you count while solving or do you capture a video an count then?

 

[unsolved]

First try on 5x5x5:

62 centers, 48.31
74 edges, 1:02.69
56 3x3x3 (bad end), 31.64

2469 centers, AvG edges.

The times are high because I'm counting moves, but that was a perfectly normal 5x5x5 solve.

EDIT:
2nd try:
59 centers, 38.94
82 edges (parity), 1:20.50
54 33x3, 32.07

That is some impressive center move counts. My 5x5x5 program is experimenting with tredge-first (in an attempt to avoid parity at the end) vs. center-first in terms of which has the lower overall move count. So far, it seems centers-first wins, but in a few cases the tredge-first solutions have prevailed.

I also experimented with fixed-depth searches. Even by only looking ahead 7 moves on scrambles 60+ moves in length, the program can find a way to restore 30+ centers on the 5x5x5. As I gather more data, at some point, I'd like to have a friendly "humans vs. computer" for shortest center solves of some scrambles. Once I see what it is some of you do, I may be able to write some better code. Now, the program is just fast and dumb, with nothing to guide its center searches.

 

[willtri4]

whoa almost 8 year bump. That's gotta be a record, or close to it

 

[unsolved]

whoa almost 8 year bump. That's gotta be a record, or close to it

Well the forum rules clearly state to search for existing content before spawning new threads. I've been reprimanded more than once regarding "creating something new" when a pre-existing thread was available.

There are no other options: Either I must resurrect the dead or duplicate what already exists.

The important thing is, the new post has relevance, and it was not done just for the sake of keeping a closed topic open. Back in 2008, the technology did not exist to solve the 5x5x5 (using a program) in a reasonable amount of time. Today, there are two programs that I know of: Mine and the one in development by the forum member named IAssemble.

Here is a recent cage-solving method used by my program. Looks like 69 moves for centers, 88 for edges, 10 for corners, 167 total.

L' B' U L2 U F' U' F2 U' R2 // corners solved in 10
R F U' 2L D L' D' 2L' B F' L R' // 11 edges
L D' 2R2 D L' R D' 2R2 D R' // 15 edges
3R U' 3R' D 3F' D2 3F 3R U 3R' D // 19 edges
2U' B' D' 3R D2 3R' B 2U B' D' B // 23 edges
F' 2L' F R2 F2 R F 2L F' R' F2 R2 // 27 edges
2D2 2U' F' U' F 2D2 2U2 F' U F 2U' // 30 edges
2B U' 2B' F2 L' 2B L F2 U L' 2B' L // 33 edges
F R' F 2R2 F' R F 2R2 F2 // cage completed in 98 moves total
2R 2F' 2B' 2R' 3R' 2L' 2F2 2B 3R 2L 2F'
L' 3U 2R 3U' L R 3F' 2R' 3F R'
2R' F' 2B' 2R 2F' 2B2 2R' F 2B' 2R 2F
2U2 2R D' 2R' 2U2 2D' 2R D 2R' 2D
2R2 3F' L' 3U2 2B' 3U2 2B L 3F 2R2
R 2U' R 3U R' 2U R 3U' R2
2L2 U' 2R2 U 2L2 U' 2R2 U // 167 moves total, so centers required 69 moves