Author |
Message |
jpoos
Posted on: Tue May 23, 2017 10:18 am
Posts: 158 Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:28 pm
|
One down
Three to go
|
|
|
|
pnm
Posted on: Tue May 23, 2017 10:53 am
Posts: 3304 Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 11:58 pm
|
Re: One down
I wrote to sheldolina a few times, saying her #1 position is threatened, but I guess she's too busy..
|
|
|
|
jpoos
Posted on: Sat Aug 26, 2017 7:34 pm
Posts: 158 Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:28 pm
|
Two down
Two to go
|
|
|
|
paulv66
Posted on: Sun Aug 27, 2017 12:26 am
Posts: 959 Location: Ukraine Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 10:03 pm
|
Re: One down
Congratulations! Those are amazingly fast times! As a numbers geek, I'm also amazed at the consistency in relative speed over the two puzzle sizes. You are .0936% faster in the 4x4 and .0933% faster in the 5x5.
|
|
|
|
jpoos
Posted on: Sun Aug 27, 2017 10:06 am
Posts: 158 Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:28 pm
|
Re: One down
paulv66 wrote: As a numbers geek, I'm also amazed at the consistency in relative speed over the two puzzle sizes. You are .0936% faster in the 4x4 and .0933% faster in the 5x5. That 4x4 screenshot was actually a few months ago though, so that doesn't really work anymore
|
|
|
|
pnm
Posted on: Sun Aug 27, 2017 10:35 am
Posts: 3304 Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 11:58 pm
|
Re: One down
paulv66 wrote: As a numbers geek, I'm also amazed at the consistency in relative speed over the two puzzle sizes. You are .0936% faster in the 4x4 and .0933% faster in the 5x5. How did you calculate the 0.0936 % and 0.0933 % ?
|
|
|
|
jpoos
Posted on: Sun Aug 27, 2017 12:14 pm
Posts: 158 Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:28 pm
|
Re: One down
pnm wrote: How did you calculate the 0.0936 % and 0.0933 % ? 0.0936... = 100 - (4.268/4.272)*100 0.0933... = 100 - (10.704/10.714)*100
|
|
|
|
paulv66
Posted on: Sun Aug 27, 2017 12:17 pm
Posts: 959 Location: Ukraine Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 10:03 pm
|
Re: One down
pnm wrote: How did you calculate the 0.0936 % and 0.0933 % ? Divided the faster time by the slower time and substracted the answer from 1. Is that not the correct way to do it? The fact that the times are so close to each other is amazing in the first place. The fact that the percentage differences are so similar is even more striking. But it's just a coincidence. They happen all the time.
|
|
|
|
pnm
Posted on: Sun Aug 27, 2017 12:23 pm
Posts: 3304 Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 11:58 pm
|
Re: One down
paulv66 wrote: Divided the faster time by the slower time and substracted the answer from 1. Is that not the correct way to do it?
Ah ok, got ya. I was thinking about differences between the 4x4 and 5x5, like what if you divide the 4x4 times by 16 and the 5x5 times by 25, do you get a similar "time per cell" ..
|
|
|
|
marblevolcano
Posted on: Sun Aug 27, 2017 2:00 pm
Posts: 279 Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 2:17 pm
|
Re: One down
pnm wrote: Ah ok, got ya. I was thinking about differences between the 4x4 and 5x5, like what if you divide the 4x4 times by 16 and the 5x5 times by 25, do you get a similar "time per cell" .. I wouldn't think so. Larger puzzles need more thinking and/or "moving to cell" time than smaller puzzles. The best times for 4x4s go over 4 cells per second, whereas the quickest solves for 5x5s are around 3 and the fastest for 6x6s are only a little ways over 2 cells per second. I also am working towards my own goals - trying to get 100 puzzles under what I consider good times - 10s for 4x4, 30 for 5x5, and 1 minute for 6x6. I have reached one goal (4x4) and I am close to both of the others.
|
|
|
|
|