• 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 35,000+ people from around the world today!

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

Comparison of ZZ/Petrus LS/LL Methods

Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
1,532
Likes
315
Thread starter #1
Various versions of this chart have been floating around Discord for a while, so I thought it would be beneficial to share with others. Normally, this wouldn't warrant it's own thread, but I think it's more important than many current threads.

It compares algorithm count and move count for several popular Last Slot / Last Layer variants for methods that orient edges beforehand (Petrus, ZZ, Heise, ie good methods). Frequency-normalized movecount statistics are either exact or calculated from a large number of HARCS solution simulations with popular published algorithm sets.

The closer you are to the origin, the better "bang for your buck". If a variant is both below and to the left of another variant (of the same number of looks), it is superior in these categories. The red line is a quadratic fit to the data, drawn for reference. Information on these variants can be found on the wiki.

zzlsll.png

as executed:
Code:
Method         Step 1        Step 2        Step 3         AUFS        Total        Alg Count
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ZBLL           7.04          14.37         ---            1.5         22.91        493
ZZ-b (alg)     7.77          14.64         ---            2.25        24.66        227
CR             5.33          9.07          9              1.5         24.90        144 (72 w/ M)
CR†            5.33          9.306         9.333          1.5         25.47        144 (72 w/ M)
Speed-Heise    5.573         9.305         9.333          1.5         25.71        72
ZZ-b (int)     10.07         14.64         ---            1.5         26.21        169
CPLS           2.6*          8.22          13.15          2.25        26.22        110
Fish & Chips   7.04          9.083         9.333          1.5         26.96        36
ZZ-CT          10.37         15.21         ---            2.25        27.83        197
WV/SV          4.67          8.74          12.82          2.25        28.48        48
COLL/EPLL      7.04          12.08         7.5            2.25        28.87        46
intuitive**    5.573         6             16.33          1.5         29.40        0
OLL/PLL        7.04          7.93          12.82          2.25        30.04        28

* 2 if cancelled with rb square
** create pair, insert while solving edges, corner commutators

Thoughts/comments?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
240
Likes
88
Location
Australia
#4
Fish and chips is a 2-look last layer method. In the 'fish' step, you solve all the edges and 1 corner (usually with sunes which have that distinctive 'fish' shape, hence the name). 'Chips' is just L3C, which you typically solve with a corner commutator.
 
Joined
Mar 21, 2018
Messages
3
Likes
0
YouTube
MrTubular
#5
Fish and chips is a 2-look last layer method. In the 'fish' step, you solve all the edges and 1 corner (usually with sunes which have that distinctive 'fish' shape, hence the name). 'Chips' is just L3C, which you typically solve with a corner commutator.
Do you have any resources or tutorials on the "fish" part?
 
Top