From dik@cwi.nl Fri May 29 20:44:04 1992 Return-Path: Received: from charon.cwi.nl by life.ai.mit.edu (4.1/AI-4.10) id AA23423; Fri, 29 May 92 20:44:04 EDT Received: from steenbok.cwi.nl by charon.cwi.nl with SMTP id AA17413 (5.65b/2.10/CWI-Amsterdam); Sat, 30 May 1992 02:44:02 +0200 Received: by steenbok.cwi.nl id AA01102 (5.65b/2.10/CWI-Amsterdam); Sat, 30 May 1992 02:44:01 +0200 Date: Sat, 30 May 1992 02:44:01 +0200 From: Dik.Winter@cwi.nl Message-Id: <9205300044.AA01102.dik@steenbok.cwi.nl> To: J.M.Kloosterman@research.ptt.nl, cube-lovers@life.ai.mit.edu Subject: Re: Lower-bound Kociemba's algorithm As an afterthough, it would be interesting if it is possible to reduce the number of moves in your fourth phase. The main difference between your algorithm and Kociemba's is that yours is deterministic. Kociemba's algorithm performs quite a number of searches before finding the optimal solution. And even than it is not known whether the solution is indeed optimal, longer searches might reveal better solutions. Your algorithm gives an upper bound to the number of moves, and the solution is reached in limited time. Kociemba's algorithm is in theory unlimited in time. My experience is that it is best to limit the first phase in Kociemba's algorithm to 13 moves. But that is only because of time constraints. dik -- dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland dik@cwi.nl