For those of you who use Cube Explorer to find algorithms, I have noticed some serious errors in the program that prevent it from finding the optimal algorithms for certain cases. In some cases it doesn't even come close to finding the optimal algorithm. I have attached an image using version 5.13, showing two Waterman/LMCF cases where it fails to find the optimal algorithm, in one of the cases it isn't even close. I have noticed this effect over the last 2 years and I thought the events were just occasional bugs, but after generating hundreds of algorithms I have now found that as much as 1 in 5 cases I can find algorithms by hand that are faster and never found by the program. Please note that sometimes algorithms are obscured by preceding U/U' or M/M' or R/R' L/L' and you need to look further down the list to see these 'hidden' variants with setup moves, but I assure you I have already taken that into account and if you play with the two examples in the image, you'll see what I mean.
If for some reason you can't view the image, try this scramble:
M' D' M' U M D M' U' M2
This is a scramble for Waterman Set 2 where you solve UR+DR while orienting the midges.
The shortest algorithm and fastest was found by hand:
M2 U M D' M' U' M D [8]
If you insist on correcting the centers like cube explorer does, then the solution adds M:
M2 U M D' M' U' M D M [9]
However if you plug this case into cube explorer the shortest algorithms it finds are 10 moves, and at no point will it find the above algorithm. This is one of dozens of such cases. I have been working on the latest revision to the LMCF method and now as many as 20% of the algorithms have been found by hand, since they can't be found by cube explorer. As I understand it this is the utility that most people use to generate algorithms, and it makes me wonder if ZBLL, OLLCP, VLS or any of the big sets are actually optimal, there could be hundreds of amazing algorithms never found. If you know of any utility that can actually find the correct algorithm in the two cases provided, please let me know.
See attached image.
If for some reason you can't view the image, try this scramble:
M' D' M' U M D M' U' M2
This is a scramble for Waterman Set 2 where you solve UR+DR while orienting the midges.
The shortest algorithm and fastest was found by hand:
M2 U M D' M' U' M D [8]
If you insist on correcting the centers like cube explorer does, then the solution adds M:
M2 U M D' M' U' M D M [9]
However if you plug this case into cube explorer the shortest algorithms it finds are 10 moves, and at no point will it find the above algorithm. This is one of dozens of such cases. I have been working on the latest revision to the LMCF method and now as many as 20% of the algorithms have been found by hand, since they can't be found by cube explorer. As I understand it this is the utility that most people use to generate algorithms, and it makes me wonder if ZBLL, OLLCP, VLS or any of the big sets are actually optimal, there could be hundreds of amazing algorithms never found. If you know of any utility that can actually find the correct algorithm in the two cases provided, please let me know.
See attached image.
Attachments

310.9 KB Views: 22