• Welcome to SpeedSolving.com — the world’s largest puzzle community!

    You’re currently browsing as a guest, which means you have limited access to discussions, resources, member profiles, and community features.

    Join 50,000+ cubers and puzzle enthusiasts from around the world to ask questions, share solves, improve faster, and be part of the community.

    Registration is free, fast, and easy — create your account today.

    Already a member? Log in here to hide this message and start participating.

Memory Methods

Computer game routes have been mentioned a few times. I've been using Super Mario, Zelda, and Banjo Kazooie routes exclusively since I started using journeys, they're pretty good. One advantage that I like is that it is well suited to a slightly cartoon-like/slapstick sort of images, which help to exaggerate them. You might not get that as much on games with more realistic graphics though. I'm starting to learn some speedrunning, and I'm going to try and make a memo route around the speedrun route, as that would be pretty awesome.
 
I'm posting here a new memo idea I had today. If this becomes a method, I'm going to call it:

Intentional Collision System (ICS)
If you know what an hash table is, you already know what I mean by collision (don't worry, I will explain).
Note 1: I will describe this system as a letter-based one, but it can be easily modified so that it doesn't require letters at all.
Note 2: I haven't tested this system yet, and I think it will be hard to do it for me, because my memo scheme is stuck in my mind so much that I can't even change a single letter (and I've tried to do it).

How I thought of this system
For people whose first language is kinda "poor" in terms of different possible sounds (vowels and consonants), it might be hard for blindcubers to find a decent memo scheme. So in the end on might have different letters that are pronounced in the same way (for example, I have C, Q and K in my scheme, which is a total disaster for an italian-based audio memo system). My idea was: let's turn this disadvantage into an advantage!

The idea
So you need 22 different letters for your edges memo scheme? Use the 11 most common in your language (possibly consonants). Now, someone will reply saying that 11 = 22/2. Good point. So, you'll have the same letter twice, in two different spots around your cube. To make the system easier, place them in two very different spots (like UL and FR, not like, for example, DB and DL). Now, if you memorize pieces in pairs, you will have 4 different pairs represented by the same pair of letters: this is what I mean by collision. Now, a few techniques to solve this problem:

1. Visual Help
Since you gave the same letter to very "different" pieces, visual memo may help you: memorize letters with audio loop (or something else, but I think audio loop will fit better than anything else), while "having an idea" of where your cycle is. This can be a very fast method, but it isn't safe at all; only possibly useful for 3BLD.
This is the technique that requires the most experimentation, but also, in my opinion, the only one that can really be better than more common techniques (I think the other 2 techniques have exactly the same potential as other methods like standard letter-pairing or images).

2. Vowel insertion
Inspired by this. For each pairs of pieces with the same letter, label them either 0 or 1 (so you will have, for example, C0 C1 B0 B1 etc...). This will be easier, again, if the two different pieces are very different, so you can dived them, in your mind, in, for example, good and bad, or right and wrong, or any other pair of opposite adjectives. Now, Your memo pair will look like XaYb with X and Y consonants and a and b binary digits (bits). Assign to each possible 2-digit binary number a vowel, like this:
00 = a
01 = e
10 = i
11 = o

Now, memorize the word XabY with your favourite technique.
Example: memo is C1D0; 10 = i, so you memorize CID.
Depending on the language you use, this can be useful for fast memorization or for longer duration purposes.

3. Image-modifiers
For this technique, we combine letter-pair images with the idea we used before, but now to each 2-digit binary number doesn't correspond a vowel, but an image-modifier (I couldn't find a better name, I mean something that is for an image what an adjective is for a word).
Example:
00 = destruction
01 = small/young
10 = big/old
11 = plurality

If the letter pair corresponds to, for example, dog, the 4 option will be something like a dead dog, a puppy, a mastiff and 101 dalmatians (from the movie). Applied to the house image this will be something like a burnt house, a small wooden house, a skyscraper and a city.
This will be useful for multiBLD or big cubes: will have 440 images at the price (effort) of 110! (where "!" doesn't mean "factorial").

That's all folks.
Does this look any good?
 
Interesting idea, thanks for posting. I might try it for audio loop corners, I already use a hax image system which gets good image/effort ratio. Actually, my current audio loop labells stickers based on different sounds rather than letters (that is I started with a list of vowel and consonant sounds rather than a list of letters). I'd been thinking of shuffling around the sounds a little as it's a little awkward as it stands (probably a bad design by me rather than a bad idea in general), but I might try the vowel insertion method above too and see which works out better. I might even be able to do audio loop edges for 3BLD if it works out well enough, which would be really nice, then use something else for corners.

Possible idea:
00 = a
01 = e
10 = i
11 = o
as used above. Then example section of memo is B0 C0 D1 F0, you could join it into one extended 'word' and have BaCeDiF.
 
Very good idea. I use it for over the year, with a vowel insertion and little modification (peculiarities of Russian language), and it helped me a lot with TuRBo for edges: you just set B0, C0, D0, K0... for all good stickers (if you don't know, what a good sticker is, see here) and B1, C1, D1 for all bad stickers. Now when you have a 3-cycle (buffer is UF), you setup all edges onto the top, left or right side using only U, R, L, D, and sticker indexes have not changed! This helps you to calculate final orientation of edges after setup and what alg you must execute. (There some other tricks, like, if you setup all edges on front or back side, then the indexes of E-slice edges are changed).

Now I use speed-opt commutators for edges, and this system still helps me, but in a more complex way to describe (sticker indexes kind of help me to recognize a case).
 
If you see an unoriented edge, you can use (M'U)3 U (MU)3 U at the beginning with your edge buffer because this edge can be reoriented as you want, it will be in the good orientation at the end of the solve. Maybe you'll have to use a set-up move.
 
If you see an unoriented edge, you can use (M'U)3 U (MU)3 U at the beginning with your edge buffer because this edge can be reoriented as you want, it will be in the good orientation at the end of the solve. Maybe you'll have to use a set-up move.

But if you twist this edge and your buffer edge, the whole edge chain will be wrong
 
Can you guys help me out? I always forget to orient the unoriented edges and therefore have fully solved cubes except for unoriented edges.

What I do is this: I start every solve with my feet spread apart. When memorizing, if I find that I have unoriented edges that need flipping at the end, I move my feet together. Then, I never stop the timer without checking to see if my feet are together - if they are, I know there must be edges that need flipping. Before I started doing this, I had the same problem you have. I'd say this increases my overall accuracy by 15% or so.
 
Does anyone here actually use a PAO system? I think it would be the most efficient once completed, in combination with a journey.
I've currently got ~115-120 PAOs between my 00-99 digit system and my attempt at an A-X cube system. Now, I think what most people see as a problem with PAO is
a) too hard. Far too many to come up with (if done with letter pairs; i.e., AA-XX each have there own PAO)
b) odd number (A-X) makes it hard to keep track of parity.
What I started doing today (still getting used to it, so I'm a little slow) is taking a person and action from my Single letter PAO list and then for the object using a letter pair object. You could start with something like this and then as time goes on slowly add onto your list of PAOs, adding in Actions next (but then you've got the odd problem again), and then finally adding in a person for each letter pair. It's a lot of PAOs, but it's definitely doable. I know some memory people have PAO systems for digits 000-999. That's 1,000 PAOs. We're only needing
(22*22) = 484 PAOs (cause there are 2 letter pairs for each letter that are not needed - the letter again and the letter on the other side of the piece.)
If one wanted to do this for corners, that would be only 441 images. If this system were completed entirely, you could store 6 letters in a single image.

Example memo: F2 D B2 L2 D B2 D F2 U2 B2 L B2 R D' B' D' U' R2 B2 U2 F'
I'll be using Speffz lettering scheme to simplify things. Scramble in your solving orientation. UBL and DF buffers.
Edges: MR-DS-NL-JG-OI-QP (I hope I didn't make a mistake :p)
With letter pairs: Mars, Death Star, Nail, Jigaloo, Oil, Quarter Pounder
Mars is exploded by the death star. A nail flies out and stabs a can of jigaloo, causing it to explode and spill oil everywhere. The oil covers up a pile of quarter pounder burgers from McDonalds.
...or something like that. This one works really well to incorporate all the images together in one image, but sometimes you may have to use more.
With the current PAO thing I'm using (1-1-2 = 4): Merry (lotr) rips the death star in half. Noah licks a jaguar. Obi Wan injects a quarter pounder.
3 images.
Full letter pair PAO (2-2-2 = 6): Merry (lotr) sings (action from the person in my 00-99 system that would be DS using the "Major system"), and a nail shatters from the high-pitched-ness of it. Dory (67 - JG in major system. Don't ask why it's dory, this is just an example anyway) spills (OI = oil = oil spill) a bucket of heads (PAO object for QP equiv in major system)

I'll write more later.
 
I tried PAO for a while, but realised I could create better images with sentences because it provides more freedom. For that example memo:

MR-DS-NL-JG-OI-QP -> "MR Owen (friend who plays a lot of Nintendo DS) shooting a NaiL gun into a JoGger, who shouts "OI!" (cheeky audio pair.) He drops his eQuiPment and runs away."

For me that would form one image from 12 letters and could be placed in just one room on a memory route. I find this useful in big cube BLD and multiBLD and even things like memorising playing cards and lists because I can encode a lot of information quickly, use less rooms and images, and gives me a lot more freedom to be imaginitive, which is probably the most important part for forming vivid images that don't need reviewing constantly.

I've also never taken time to learn a set list, and have always determined my letter pair images on the spot because it allows for more freedom for imagination. Tricky pairs I will occasionally write down, but the point is letter pairs can get overused and become boring, so even my favourite letter pairs won't last forever.
 
Last edited:
I believe that PAO is superior to regular images if done properly. With regular images, you end up improvising some sort of interaction between the images anyway. PAO simply codifies the interaction and allows you to store more memorization because the action is storing some information as well.

I tried to make a list once but I stopped because I never do anything bigger than 3BLD and I believe sounds in combination with sentences are just as good and much easier for 3x3.
 
I remember that Chuck (Wicaksono Adi), who was one of the best multiBLD solvers back several years ago when he was active, advocated person-action. Not person-action-object, but it's still halfway there. While his results seem completely ordinary today, they were rather impressive at the time.

I know that I essentially have "verbified" and "adjectivified" versions of many of my images, and I often substitute those when they seem convenient. For instance, MP is a mop, but I often have someone mopping something when I get that image. I should really stop being lazy and try to come up with a complete list, just to see how it does. I wonder then if I should put more images at a particular location if I do that. Right now, I put 3 images at each location for big cubes (although I use more than that for multiBLD). I wonder if I might not be able to move up to 6 or even 9 images per location - if that would be better or worse.
 
I remember that Chuck (Wicaksono Adi), who was one of the best multiBLD solvers back several years ago when he was active, advocated person-action. Not person-action-object, but it's still halfway there. While his results seem completely ordinary today, they were rather impressive at the time.

I know that I essentially have "verbified" and "adjectivified" versions of many of my images, and I often substitute those when they seem convenient. For instance, MP is a mop, but I often have someone mopping something when I get that image. I should really stop being lazy and try to come up with a complete list, just to see how it does. I wonder then if I should put more images at a particular location if I do that. Right now, I put 3 images at each location for big cubes (although I use more than that for multiBLD). I wonder if I might not be able to move up to 6 or even 9 images per location - if that would be better or worse.

I am kind of in the other direction. I memorize in groups of 8 letters, so I usually end up with one of the following:
Person Action Adjective Object
Adjective Person Action Object
Person Adverb Action Object
Adjective Person Adverb Action

This allows a little more wiggle room with the same kind of recall.

Side Note: I prefer the term character over person
Side Note 2: I also use MoP for MP =D
 
I have just recently started using a Letterpair PAO-ish type system where I have 26 groups of 26 characters that each have An accesory and action that I link to have 10 letters in a loci.for example, Ash ketchum in piccolo's cape uses Avada Kedavra on a wartortle wearing Gandalf's hat and holding his stick would fit in a loci.

I also like this for numbers since they are grouped in 10's which makes it easier to find say the 326th letter of pi in a roman room.

Another trick I figured out for cards is that the first four parts of the image tell me the number and color of the cards while i use an audio loop to remind me wheather it is clubs/spades hearts/diamonds. I then translate the audio into the last image in the loci. This gives me 8 cards in a loci and an easy compromise to the Ben system which would have required me to quadruple my image list. I have never heard of anyone else using a system like this for cards, but it was a convient way for me to make my blindsoving system work better than a single card PAO.
 
that seems like a pretty good PAO thing. For cards, that seems pretty hard though... how can you keep track of club/spade/heart/diamond for 52 different cards? I really like normal PAO for cards. I end up getting 3 per loci, which is a fairly good amount. 8 cards in a loci seems awfully crammed like you may mix up images.
 
Back
Top