Comments on: Pursuing Sudoku with Pseudo-code

By: Website optimisation

Website optimisation — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 02:10:31 +0000

Soduku is fun but time consuming

By: super sudoku solver

super sudoku solver — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 09:50:06 +0000

a waste of time.. that’s blasphemy! I can’t gte enough these days.

By: Jack Eisenhover

Jack Eisenhover — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 18:27:22 +0000

Dear Editor

while looking for simple solutions and explanantions for Sudoku solvers, I came up with the following site
http://alumni.cs.ucsb.edu/~vijay/Sudoku.html

It seems to explain solutions easily and claims to solve evil problems.

Personally, I find Sudokus a gross waste of time.

Jack-E

By: OddThinking » Solving the Circuit Game

OddThinking » Solving the Circuit Game — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 06:30:40 +0000

[...] will be familiar with my approach to puzzle-solving, and will remember a number of different puzzles that I automated in the [...]

By: Julie Lawrence

Julie Lawrence — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 02:48:16 +0000

Hey Julian, isn’t Sukoku just a variant on Latin Squares and Combinatorial Designs? I did my never-completed PhD on algorithms for completing combinatorial designs, but can’t remember enough about it (and haven’t bothered trying) to be sure that I’m right.

Latin Squares, as I’m sure you know, are n x n grids which can only have the elements 1..n appearing once in each row. Combinatorial designs are ways of choosing a set of sets of 1..n elements, such that each element occurs a set number of times. eg a 2(9,3,1) design is a bunch of 3-sets, such that each element occurs in exactly two of the 3-sets

A combinatorial design has one or more “defining set”, being a partial design which can only be completed in one way (and a “minimal defining set” being the smallest such set) i.e. the entries you start off with in a sudoku puzzle are simply a defining set.

Anyone know anything more about whether these things are interchangable?

julie

By: OddThinking » Get a Sudo-Clue!

OddThinking » Get a Sudo-Clue! — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 10:59:32 +0000

[...] couple of days ago I wrote about Sudoku, and how it had been overhyped by the [...]

By: trobin

trobin — Mon, 06 Aug 2007 18:45:02 +0000

This message is for “wossname”

.8…..2.
..1…6..
2…5…3
..65.12..
7..6.4..9
..47.93..
6…1…5
..7…9..
.4…..3.

I used my own “ELIMINATION” method to solve this problem in aproximately 25 minutes without resorting to guessing on a pair. Would love to find a publisher that would be interested in this method/grid that I have developed. Any suggestions??

By: wossname

wossname — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 18:03:33 +0000

.8…..2.
..1…6..
2…5…3
..65.12..
7..6.4..9
..47.93..
6…1…5
..7…9..
.4…..3.

My Deterministic solver fails at solving the above. Can anyone solve prove me wrong?

By: OddThinking » Solitaire Battleships

OddThinking » Solitaire Battleships — Thu, 28 Sep 2006 09:25:56 +0000

[...] My approach Solitaire Battleships was a precursor to my very similar approaches to Sudoku, Nonograms and Kakuro. [...]

By: Piggy

Piggy — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 12:25:06 +0000

Re Ganesh and others, I think there is a convention in the newspaper puzzles–this is basically rephrasing Sam’s sets.

-Easy: can be done with simple elimination.

– Medium: can be done with multi-step elimination.

– Hard: there is a unique solution but it cannot be found with elimination alone, therefore at least one guess-and-backtrack is necessary.