RSS
Facebook
Twitter

Friday, January 17, 2014

A new approach to Bible Atlas Goose Thigh?

As a math lover and an amateur magician (owing in part to Martin Gardner's excellent writings), I can't help but ask a question about a classic mathematical card trick. This question could be answered easily with the aid of a computer, I imagine.

The trick is known under numerous names, including Mutus Nomen Dedit Cocus. The gist is that a spectator secretly selects one of ten pairs of cards, and the magician deals them, seemingly randomly, into four rows of five cards apiece, and asks the spectator which row or rows contain the cards. In actuality, the magician is dealing the cards in such a way that each pair of cards corresponds to a different pair of rows. Using a mnemonic such as MUTUS NOMEN DEDIT COCUS or BIBLE ATLAS GOOSE THIGH, the cards can be readily identified. For example, using BIBLE ATLAS GOOSE THIGH as our mnemonic, if the cards are in the first and second rows, they correspond to the pair of L's shared by BIBLE and ATLAS, meaning the fourth card in the first row and the third card in the second row are the answer.

There is also a trick called Rubik's Cards or Order from Chaos where cards in seemingly random order are put in order via an unusual series of moves which at first glance appear to be mixing them up even further. The question is whether instead of dealing the cards out in a seemingly random order, one can appear to thoroughly mix up the cards before dealing them out. Of course, remembering a five-word mnemonic and a series of shuffles might be harder than just memorizing the words and dealing the cards accordingly, but it might make the trick more of a fooler. As an added bonus, there are certain arrangements (such as AABCD BEEFG CFHHI DGIJJ) that would be unsuited for the "deal them randomly" presentation of the trick, because the pattern of the dealing would be obvious, but by appearing to mix the cards up, such arrangements can be employed.

The cards start in the order AABBCCDDEEFFGGHHIIJJ, and our goal is to get them in an order that is equivalent to one of the numerous mnemonics, such as MUTUS NOMEN DEDIT COCUS or BIBLE ATLAS GOOSE THIGH, via a simple-to-remember series of controlled shuffles. If a computer is given a database of several such shuffles, it can work out the simplest way to use them to get from our starting point to our ending point. It is worth noting first that there are not actually 20! permutations of the 20 cards, since we're dealing with 10 pairs of cards. Naively, one might divide 20! by 2^10=1024 to calculate the number of permutations. However, it is even fewer than that; we only care about which cards are paired with which other cards. AABBCDDC is the same as CCAADBBD. Therefore, there are a mere 19*17*15*13*11*9*7*5*3*1=1,382,205,825 permutations in the search space. A Rubik's Cube has 43,252,003,274,489,856,000 positions, and God's Algorithm has been calculated for that, so I doubt that this particular problem will be much harder computationally.

Here are the controlled shuffles employed in Rubik's Cards:
  • The n Frustration Count: The top n cards are reversed and put below the rest of the deck. A 2 Frustration Count (2FC) on ABCDEFGHIJKLM yields CDEFGHIJKLMBA.
  • The n,m Block Count: Cards are dealt to the table in blocks of n and m, reversing the order of the blocks, but not the cards within the blocks. A 3,2 Block Count (3,2BC) on ABCDEFGHIJKLM yields KLMIJFGHDEABC.
  • The Reverse Faro Shuffle: Cards are alternately injogged and outjogged so the cards in even-numbered positions stick out, and then are put either below (for a Reverse Out Shuffle) or on top of (for a Reverse In Shuffle) the cards in odd-numbered positions. A Reverse In Shuffle (RIS) on ABCDEFGHIJKLM yields BDFHJLACEGIKM.
  • The Australian Shuffle: The cards are alternately dealt "down" to the table and "under" the rest of the pack. ABCDEFGHIJKLM becomes JFBLHDMKIGECA.
In Rubik's Cards, the cards start in the order LKBFAEMJIDCGH, and become ordered as follows:

2FC: LKBFAEMJIDCGH -> BFAEMJIDCGHKL
3FC: BFAEMJIDCGHKL -> EMJIDCGHKLAFB
4FC: EMJIDCGHKLAFB -> DCGHKLAFBIJME
3,2BC: DCGHKLAFBIJME -> JMEBILAFHKDCG
RIS:  JMEBILAFHKDCG -> MBLFKCJEIAHDG
AS: MBLFKCJEIAHDG -> ABCDEFGHIJKLM

The cards don't appear to be in any particular order until the final step. Of course, the person who created this trick probably just took some random-looking, but easily remembered, moves and reversed them to get the starting configuration. In this problem, we're given a starting configuration and an ending configuration, and wish to find the shortest route. It's trivial to prove that any configuration can be reached via 1FC's and 2FC's (although such a solution is potentially extremely long, not to mention that 1FC's seem inelegant to me), but by adding more controlled shuffles to the database and taking advantage of the fact that we have a choice of many ending positions (the words BIBLE ATLAS GOOSE THIGH can be placed in 24 different orders, they can be dealt from a deck of BAGTITOHBLOILASGESEH or from a deck of BIBLEATLASGOOSETHIGH), surely a reasonably memorable solution can be found. We only have under 1.4 billion positions to navigate, after all!

(Addendum: A proposed generalization of the Australian shuffle is the n Australian Shuffle, where there are n unders after each down. Thus, the AS becomes the 1AS, a 0AS reverses the order of the deck, and a 3AS turns ABCDEF into BDFCEA.)

Thursday, December 19, 2013

Grant's Review Corner: Volume 11

From the same guy who brought you Dinner With Moriarty, the murder mystery where the murderer kills himself approximately 17.7% of the time, we get this computer game from 2011. Is the author of this game any better at writing stories since 1997? Juubi and I will find out together!

The incredible thing is that this guy's company Everett Kaser Software sells a CD with 32 games on it! At least he has the sense to sell it for a mere $99.95, as opposed to Action 52's price tag of $199. If the other 30 games are the same quality as these two games, then. . . well, you can immediately surmise whether to buy it or not.

ERRATUM: Dansk is actually Danish, not Dutch. I got the first letter right, at least.

Friday, December 6, 2013

Grant's Review Corner: Volume 10

For the tenth edition of Grant's Review Corner, this one's a video instead of a bunch of text! This review tackles a game that's haunted me since the early 2000's; I've felt it necessary to finally get my opinions on this game out of the way for all to see.


Perhaps I'll review more of this company's games in the future, but for now, I think my opinion on this one summarizes my opinion on virtually all of the games.

Friday, November 1, 2013

Puzzle 614: Process of Illumination 41

I'm trying to train my mother in the fine art of solving Process of Illumination puzzles; thus far, she's having some trouble with it, but desires more training to get stronger. I have a huge pool to pull from. . . .

Sunday, October 27, 2013

Puzzle 613: Dominnocuous 8

My mother got a much-needed laugh out of my latest Grant's Review Corner, in which I recount our shared experience with a crossword edited by Timothy Parker for a "for Dummies" book. Also, with my gentle guidance, she solved her first Dominnocuous, which was also my blog's first Dominnocuous! Moms rock sometimes. :)

Saturday, October 26, 2013

Grant's Review Corner: Volume 9

First, an update on the previous edition of Grant's Review Corner: the puzzles I was paid to write for Kakuro Conquest have not appeared yet in almost two years. However, I have signs of life from the other end, and have decided not to post the puzzles here, and instead to wait for them to appear on Kakuro Conquest for my readers to enjoy there. (Maybe I'll post them on here if said readers want to print them out.)

My mother, a breast cancer survivor, has experienced a phenomenon called "chemo brain" where one suddenly loses a great portion of one's mental faculties after chemotherapy. While she has been intending to get her brain active again using books like this one, it seems that her hectic schedule makes this impossible without my active involvement in encouraging her and finding puzzles she can actually do. I can't really gripe about finding this excuse to spend quality time with her; I enjoy watching light bulbs go off in people's heads from time to time, and some of the simpler puzzle types in this book have provided such experiences. Maybe I'll get a finger on how to write puzzles that she can enjoy and other people can enjoy, too (which will become easier if somehow I can train her to solve harder puzzles, such as easy Sudoku puzzles). However, my mother recently got herself a different book which, after working one puzzle together, I've felt the need to vent about. Hey, blog content!


This is the cover of the book Mom got. On the positive side, the "for Dummies" series was responsible for helping me learn about WordPerfect and Windows growing up; I actually read those books for fun. (Ahh, WordPerfect. We thought you were the best, and then we learned that we could do word processing without even paying money with OpenOffice, my preferred tool for the job nowadays.) On the downside, we have Timothy Parker, who is famous for doing work for the lackluster game show Merv Griffin's Crosswords and, as a crossword editor, allowed puzzles with two-letter words, unchecked letters, and divided grids, which are a big no-no in crosswords (unless you have a good reason, such as a puzzle that revels in rule-breaking as its theme). I don't always agree with Eric Berlin's philosophy, but this post by him summarizes why the name Timothy Parker might make some puzzle experts cringe here. A puzzle community contact has said of him, "Timothy is to crossword editing as I would be to Hollywood-style stunt driving, if I was determined to do it my way and not listen to anyone else." I consider this about as scathing of a comment as the time I said I'd rather play Minesweeper with real-life mines while dodging durians, so despite what I'm sure are good faith efforts on Parker's part to be a good contributor to the realm of puzzles, perhaps he's not cut out for the job. (Of course, people who are bad at their job often improve, and I hope someone can point to evidence that Parker has improved significantly so I don't feel as bad sullying his name.)

Notice the lovely Target Sudoku on the cover. The goal of Target Sudoku is to place numbers 1-8 in the grid so every ring of the grid and every pair of adjacent slices contains the numbers 1-8. It doesn't take long to realize this is equivalent to solving two independent 4x4 Latin squares (not Sudoku, because there's no box constraint), which is only made challenging (at least, for the beginning solver) by the awkward presentation. There's an entire book of Target Sudoku for Dummies, which reeks to me of "we wanted to cash in on Sudoku without quality". Yawn. Also, what the hell is a 9 doing there? We also see a pedestrian word search grid and completed crossword grid (which thankfully doesn't correspond to a puzzle in the book, or else it would defeat the point of the answer key being inside the book).

After a million pages (or a dozen) about the importance of exercising the brain and some URL's to visit for the purpose, we get into actual puzzles. We start with four pedestrian "logic puzzles" of this variety:
The intended answer to this chestnut is that Alexander juggles the gold, which doesn't quite mesh with actual science. I think the better answer is for Alexander to pull out his magic map to get to the other side, as in King's Quest. All magicians have magic maps, right? (Also, if you're an idiot like me and wondering why magicians are expected to juggle, read this.) There's also that classic puzzle about two people being born on the same date not being twins because they're part of a set of triplets, which is like saying a figure isn't a quadrilateral because it's a square.

Then we get four riddles; I'm not a riddle fan, for reasons I can't quite put my finger on. Either I find them too easy or too hard, and without the luxury of chipping away at a solution gradually, it doesn't feel like progress comes quickly. I won't count this against the book, since it's personal taste more than being flawed.

Next are eight cryptograms. In case you forgot, here are the rules.

Two of them in particular strike me as terribly edited, having accidentally spied the solutions (thanks for not having a buffer between the last puzzle and the answers, guys!).
I think it should be a sin to publish cryptograms without ample space between lines to write one's answer. Plus, the hyphen in IGLJAQMXT doesn't belong there (if you solve the cryptogram, you'll know why), and puzzle 14 forgot the rule that a letter can't represent itself, which is glaringly obvious because my first instinct was that the single-letter word A must really be I. (A actually stands for itself.) The presence of cryptograms isn't entirely unwelcome, but the presentation is lacking.

Next are some word scrambles, and here's the one that reeks of bad editing:
First of all, this anagram goes in the wrong direction; one should start with an anagram (like CASH LOST IN 'EM) and end with a familiar phrase (SLOT MACHINES), not the other way around. That's just how they work the best. Also, note how the line breaks foul up everything and make it CASH LO STIN'EM. I didn't know STIN'EM was a word.

Next are four pedestrian word searches, about which I'll only say this: pick a font and stick to it!

And finally, here's the one puzzle my mother and I actually solved together: a crossword. I'll attempt a Rex Parker impersonation here to present my opinion.
Constructor: I assume Timothy Parker himself?

Relative difficulty: Medium
THEME: Female parents  — many different names for a female parent (MOTHER, MAMA, MAMMY, MOMMA, MOMMY, MAMMA, MOM).

Theme answers:

  • 20A: Nobel Peace Prize winner of 1979 (MOTHER TERESA)
  • 29A: Really big singer? (MAMA CASS)
  • 38A: Al Capp's Pansy Yokum (MAMMY)
  • 43A: House owner in a Martin Lawrence comedy (BIG MOMMA)
  • 51A: Term of endearment (MOMMY DEAREST)
  • 29D: "____ mia!" (MAMMA)
  • 38D: Maternal palindrome (MOM)
 Word of the Day: MOUE (53D: Pouty look) —
Definition of MOUE :  a little grimace :  pout / Origin of MOUE French, from Middle French — more at mow / First Known Use: 1850 (m-w)
I'm middling on these theme, since a lot of the affectionate nicknames for a mother are so similar, making MOTHER feel like an oddball in this context. Also, the theme entry MOM isn't symmetrically opposite another one, almost as though it wasn't intended as a theme entry. The grid is solid for an ordinary crossword, but this is supposed to be an "easy" crossword in a "for Dummies" book. I have no idea how much has to do with my mother having chemo brain, seeing as it took her 6 minutes to recall that the religion that Muslims follow is ISLAM (49D: Sunni religion), and she even suggested the facepalm-worthy BUDDHA. This is definitely harder than the crossword we did in Brain Games, where I probably did 8% of the grid filling-in and not 30% of it. I'm no dummy, but I had to look up MOUE to make sure it was a word. Also, do LOAMS and OMPHALOS really belong in a crossword aimed at dummies? My mother hasn't even heard of IAMBS before, and I assumed those were common knowledge. I lack the TEMERITY to task my mother with the "Tough" crossword if this is "Easy".

The cluing reeked something awful in a couple of spots; Term of endearment for MOMMY DEAREST irked me because of the obvious etymological cousinhood via the word DEAR, and I'm not fond of answers appearing in other clues, such as ONCE in 45D: "Once upon a midnight ____. . .". Please tell me I'm just a terrible judge of crosswords, and these clues are all right.

In closing, we get two Sudoku puzzles, a Tricky and a Tough (why put these in a "for Dummies" book when you don't have room for a bunch of easy puzzles for warming up, or solving techniques to aid the new solver?), and three pointless Target Sudoku.

Can you see why I'd confiscate this book to review it after solving that crossword? I think such a small book needs fewer pages of fluff ("this is why you should use your brain") and more puzzles, perhaps of a particular focus instead of paltry amounts of various types. Also, the book should probably be bigger.

In closing, please follow me on Twitter so you can retweet amazing tweets like this one.

Saturday, September 21, 2013

Puzzle 612: Totally Awesum 23

A while back, I was commissioned to write puzzles for Kakuro Conquest, thanks to my impressive haggling skills and talking the other person up from "hey, promote this site". I even promoted them in a volume of Grant's Review Corner, praising their solving interface for its simplicity. As much as I would love to see my puzzles playable in said interface, so far this hasn't happened. In a couple of weeks, if Kakuro Conquest shows no sign of life (including replying to the message I sent via their contact form), I will release the puzzles on this blog so they don't go to waste (and so this blog has something happening on it). The puzzle below is not one of those puzzles, but I do believe it's representative of the quality you can expect.

Edit: I have now reached out to Perfomant Design via Kakuro Conquest's contact form, the e-mail address on their site, and their Twitter account, in the best good faith effort which I can muster to give them a chance to stop me from using these puzzles without their permission. I also reached out to Kareem Ahmed, who contacted me on behalf on Performant in 2011 back when he worked closely with them, and paid me to write the puzzles in the first place. If I am getting myself into hot water, I have at the very least done everything I can think of to test the temperature safely.