What puzzle do you think the WCA should add next?

Stefan said:
But you could use more efficient packing of information. Example: if you want to memorize permutations of the numbers 1 to 4, you can of course memorize it as four digits like "1432". But there are only 4!=24 possibilities, so you could instead encode the permutation as a number from 1 to 24. That's just one or two digits to memorize instead of four. Or one letter, if you prefer.

Similarly, you can memorize a 3x3 as a string of about 20 numbers from {1,...,24}. But 24^20 is about 4*10^27, about eight digits more than the number of actually possible cube states. So you're memorizing eight digits more than strictly necessary! You can for example break the cube state down into EP, CP, EO and CO and represent each of those with a number from 1 to 12!/2, 8!, 2^11 and 3^7, which would be 22 digits. Of course those numbers are still quite large, but for 2x2 some useful tighter packing might be possible.

Btw, Richard Carr worked on a method for solving 3x3 blindfolded in pretty much 4-5 algs: one alg each for EO, CP and CO and one or two for EP.
Click to expand...
That's an interesting idea. I can't see it happening for 200 cubes though :p
 
TDM said:
That's an interesting idea. I can't see it happening for 200 cubes though :p
Click to expand...

I don't know. If you could develop a system to use, say, 2 letters to memorize the configuration of the pieces for your first face (not even bothering to memorize the solution, just the position) and then 2 more letters to memorize the CLL/EG case+AUF that will result when you solve that position, you'd be able to memorize a speedBLD solution more efficiently than a 3-cycle solution. Of course, you'd need a system to standardize your first-face approach so that for any position you memorize, you will always use the same solution, but since for EG you don't care about the permutation of the first face and don't need to distinguish the 4 pieces from each other, I would think this could be doable.
 
TDM said:
That's an interesting idea. I can't see it happening for 200 cubes though :p
Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean. The more information you have, the more it helps to pack it tightly (because memorization time is superlinear).

You could maybe come up with a method that solves like this:
0) Initial cube rotation during inspection, and memorize what to do in steps 1/2/3.
1) Apply one out of about 400 algs.
2) Cube rotation.
3) Apply one out of about 400 algs.

That would be three "images" to remember per cube, two of them having about 400 possibilities. I picked 400 because 400*24*400 is more than the number of 2x2 states:
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=sqrt((7!*3^6)/24)

Alternatives: Three algs, no cube rotations could be three "images", each having about 160 possibilities. Or with two algs and no rotation, two "images", each having about 2000 possibilities (some memory sport people do use over 2000 different images so they could encode an entire 2x2 with just two images).
 
I guess it could be done. I just don't know if there's a good way to remember ~800 numbers easily (got the number 800 from uberCuber's 4 numbers per cube). Letters would be easier to remember (I think. I don't really know, but I don't think anyone good at BLD uses numbers, and probably for a reason).
Stefan, I don't really understand your method. What do your two algs do? And why the rotation?
 
TDM said:
Stefan, I don't really understand your method. What do your two algs do? And why the rotation?
Click to expand...

I don't know what they do. That would have to be figured out. I just estimated the number of cases.
The rotation allows covering a larger number of cases.

It's similar to 3x3 last layer, which you can split into two algs plus a rotation or U turn between them. There, the two algs would be OLL+PLL or CLL+ELL or some other pair.

TDM said:
I don't think anyone good at BLD uses numbers
Click to expand...

Well:

Maskow said:
Damn it, I didn't know that, maybe with letter pairs instead of my numbers and random images I will be faster xD
I my opinion letter pairs aren't optimal at all. Maybe it's not bad but it isn't the only one way to be very fast.
Click to expand...
 
Erik said:
Also: imho there are no restrictions on how to communicate. It would be funny if someone would develop a method where you just tap different body parts of the solver to indicate what he has to do ^^
Click to expand...

It sounds like you are describing touchy feely team blind.
Daniel Sheppard and Rob Yau were the 1st to try it (that I know of) and named it.
Their UWR was taken from them by Alex Lau and Callum Goodyear at Cuthbert's in the summer.
[ForestGumpVoice]That's all I've got to say about that[/ForestGumpVoice]
 
cube-o-holic said:
It sounds like you are describing touchy feely team blind.
Daniel Sheppard and Rob Yau were the 1st to try it (that I know of) and named it.
Their UWR was taken from them by Alex Lau and Callum Goodyear at Cuthbert's in the summer.
[ForestGumpVoice]That's all I've got to say about that[/ForestGumpVoice]
Click to expand...

http://youtu.be/0pdMHepAT-o?t=26s

Probably nowhere near UWR though :p
 
kclejeune said:
Wow. Touché. But seriously, speedBLD for 200 2x2s? It just doesn't seem realistic.
Click to expand...
seeing as it took him 3+ days to memorize that as well, 200 2x2s might be possible in theory but I don't think anyone could do it in a reasonable amount of time.
 
Stefan said:
What do you (or kclejeune) mean with "reasonable amount of time"?
Click to expand...

As in, I doubt anybody would spend a year [made up amount of time, not sure how long it would take to memorize 200 2x2 solutions] or whatever memorizing 200 2x2 solutions. Let's say they used EG. They have to onelook that solve. Then they have to onelook the next. And all the others. This person has to remember every single solution, in order, blindfolded. Memorizing that as you would speedBLD, would take a very very long time.
 
kclejeune said:
As in, I doubt anybody would spend a year [made up amount of time, not sure how long it would take to memorize 200 2x2 solutions] or whatever memorizing 200 2x2 solutions. Let's say they used EG. They have to onelook that solve. Then they have to onelook the next. And all the others. This person has to remember every single solution, in order, blindfolded. Memorizing that as you would speedBLD, would take a very very long time.
Click to expand...

I don't know enough about the current speedsolving methods, but I think it should be possible in a few hours and I'd find that a reasonable amount of time. Certainly nowhere near to a year at all whatsoever.
 
Stefan said:
I don't know enough about the current speedsolving methods, but I think it should be possible in a few hours and I'd find that a reasonable amount of time. Certainly nowhere near to a year at all whatsoever.
Click to expand...

To memorize
1. How to build the face
2. Which alg to do
3. AUF
4. 199 more cubes
5. The order of all this

I'd be surprised if this could be done in two hours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

THE_V01DL0RD
Should 15-Puzzle be a WCA Event?
Replies
7
Views
1,161
abunickabhi
abunickabhi
NebraskanSpeedsolver
if my budget is $500 USD, what puzzles should I buy? (WCA, lubes, misc only)(gerernal)
2 3
Replies
48
Views
4,950
fes_77
fes_77
CubesN'StuffOfficial
  • Poll Poll
Do you think that 15 puzzle should be a WCA event?
2 3
Replies
46
Views
7,199
BenChristman1
BenChristman1
pyrapyravince
  • Poll Poll
What puzzle should be added to the wca?
Replies
5
Views
2,249
OR cuber
OR cuber
D
  • Poll Poll
Proposal: Should the WCA be responsible for lost/damaged puzzles during an attempt?
2
Replies
33
Views
5,331
Michael Womack
Michael Womack
Back
Top