• 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!

Machine learning method generation plausibility.

Etotheipi

Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2019
Messages
859
Location
somewhere on the complex plane.
I think it would be difficult (but not necessarily impossible) for a machine to be able to tell the difference between a method that is good for human solving and one that isn't... interesting idea though!
i suppose a program that gives a score.to the ergonomics would help, and maybe try and make the program slant towards block based methods so it doesnt have like 10 pieces solved in random places and then filling in the rest.
 
U

Underwatercuber

Guest
Biggest factors I can think of that it would have to consider is recognition, ergonomics, move count and alg count. If it can manage those then it can probably make a decent method.
 

PapaSmurf

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Messages
765
WCA
2016TUDO02
YouTube
Visit Channel
I don't see why it wouldn't be plausible at all. They've already made a machine that has learnt to solve a 3x3, so it'll be expanding on that idea to find methods that work for humans and are actually good.
 
Joined
May 24, 2016
Messages
907
YouTube
Visit Channel
I don't see why it wouldn't be plausible at all. They've already made a machine that has learnt to solve a 3x3, so it'll be expanding on that idea to find methods that work for humans and are actually good.
 
Top