Calcudoku puzzle forumhttp://www.calcudoku.org/forum/ Yesterday's 7x7 difficult (that's Feb 11, 2015)http://www.calcudoku.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=663 Page 2 of 2

 Author: clm  [ Fri Feb 13, 2015 12:41 am ] Post subject: Re: Yesterday's 7x7 difficult (that's Feb 11, 2015) tomas wrote:clm wrote:The parity rule is absolutely useful for this type of puzzles (the perfect reasoning of bram to decide that c7 = 4). But, in addition of this, many times it's interesting to see if a determined number can be placed or not in a determined line. For instance, another hint:Suposse that you make c3 =2, c4 = 7 then c5-c6 = [1,5]. Since g5-g6 = [1,6] and due to the three ones present in the three bottom rows, the 1 of column "b" would only be possible in cage "1-" located in b3-b4, that is, b3-b4 = [1,2].Why can the 1 of column b not appear in rows 1 or 2?clm wrote:And then, where do we place a 6 in column "b"?, there is not a place for it,I must confess I don't see that either.clm wrote:so cage "5-" (c3-c4) must necessarily be [1,6] and cage "4-" (c5-c6) = [3,7].The 1 of column "b" could not go to either b1 or b2 because c1 or c2, respectiveley, would be a 2 and you already have a 2 in c3 in this hypothesis.The 6 could not be in cage "2-" since it would produce a 4 (and there is a 4 in b5) and it can not go to b1 or b2 since c1 or c2, respectively, would be either a 5 or a 7 but both numbers are already present in column "c" in this hypothesis.

 Author: tomas  [ Fri Feb 13, 2015 12:42 am ] Post subject: Re: Yesterday's 7x7 difficult (that's Feb 11, 2015) firefly wrote:Bram had the same first two steps that I was going to post.Combined parity for rows 5-6 lead to a5=[2,6], which combined with the 4 in b5 and the 1- in ef5 will block the evens in row 5, which makes g5=1.Thanks, firefly. I have a lot to learn, it seems. It's like learning a language, practice makes perfect.firefly wrote:The combined parity of columns b-c lead to c7=4.The combined parity of rows 3-4 lead to d3=[2,6].So that's because even though some cages extend beyond these rows per se, we know for example for a4, that it contains an odd number, right? And similarly for e3...firefly wrote:A few more incidental tricks: ef6 can't have a 7 due to the 6 in g6; de4 can't have a 7 because that would leave both a4 and c4 as 1. This means that the 7's in a-c are locked in rows 4, 6, and 7, eliminating the 7s in b2, c2, and 5c, also meaning c6 can't be 3.Ah yes, quite nifty.firefly wrote:Since c6=[1,7] now, and since c34 has to be either [1,6] or [2,7], that blocks the 1's from c1 and c2. This leaves the puzzle looking like:I think honestly I might have brute forced the 4's in row 4 at this point, since it was such an obviously divergent binary option, but let me see if I can find a more elegant (ie logical) solution.Sure, have fun with that. I should get some sleep. More practice tomorrow...

 Author: tomas  [ Fri Feb 13, 2015 12:44 am ] Post subject: Re: Yesterday's 7x7 difficult (that's Feb 11, 2015) clm wrote:tomas wrote:clm wrote:The parity rule is absolutely useful for this type of puzzles (the perfect reasoning of bram to decide that c7 = 4). But, in addition of this, many times it's interesting to see if a determined number can be placed or not in a determined line. For instance, another hint:Suposse that you make c3 =2, c4 = 7 then c5-c6 = [1,5]. Since g5-g6 = [1,6] and due to the three ones present in the three bottom rows, the 1 of column "b" would only be possible in cage "1-" located in b3-b4, that is, b3-b4 = [1,2].Why can the 1 of column b not appear in rows 1 or 2?clm wrote:And then, where do we place a 6 in column "b"?, there is not a place for it,I must confess I don't see that either.The 1 of column "b" could not go to either b1 or b2 because c1 or c2, respectiveley, would be a 2 and you already have a 2 in c3 in this hypothesis.The 6 could not be in cage "2-" since it would produce a 4 (and there is a 4 in b5) and it can not go to b1 or b2 since c1 or c2, respectively, would be either a 5 or a 7 but both numbers are already present in column "c" in this hypothesis.Yes, you're right. I wasn't thinking through all the consequences of the original assumption.

 Author: firefly  [ Fri Feb 13, 2015 12:46 am ] Post subject: Re: Yesterday's 7x7 difficult (that's Feb 11, 2015) tomas wrote:Why can the 1 of column b not appear in rows 1 or 2?clm is basically doing a TaE on the puzzle at that point. Assuming c3=2 means that neither c1 nor c2 can be 2, which means that neither b1 nor b2 can be 1. He just didn't spell out that step.tomas wrote:I must confess I don't see that either.Again, leading from c5=5 in his TaE, that eliminates the possibility of c1 or c2 being 5, which eliminates b1 or b2 being 6.

 Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC + 1 hour [ DST ] Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Grouphttp://www.phpbb.com/