| Subject: Re: In Depth Treasure Magazine Grid Analysis |
Author:
Adam
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: Sat, Aug 16 2003, 8:25:02
In reply to:
Stephen Day
's message, "Re: In Depth Treasure Magazine Grid Analysis" on Fri, Aug 15 2003, 4:53:15
Your correct about my missing the "column rule." The rule specifically states that the same number is used in each column position, meaning only 3 numbers out of the 180 numbers can be used per 3x3 grid. My "number sets" posted did not take this into account.
Unfortunately, rather than expanding my choices in terms of translation, I've noticed my mistake actually makes matters much, much harder.
I'm going to think through this, so bear with me and my math for a moment.
What I have done, erroneously, is enforce a rule stating that only 1 additional number is added per grid, not per column. My total translation options are _severly_ underaccounted for.
What I have been calculating, computationally speaking, is:
174 Grids * 240 Possible Integers _per grid_: 41760 Calculations. With all the overhead that goes into calculating and deciphering each grid, this seems to be very near the memory limits of my machine.
The column rule, however, makes this an exponentially harder problem. The question now becomes (how many distinct ways can I choose 3 items from 240 items) * 174 grids, which is n!/((n-k)!k!) * 174, where n = 240 and k = 3. This puts me in the neighborhood of 2.3 million possible translations _per grid_, or roughly 400 million total possible translations.
(I just know if John was around these days he'd try and tell me that it is only 174 * 240 * 3. This is, unfortunately for us, not the case. Everyone please whip out your dusty discreet mathematics textbooks. Everyone saved their college textbooks, right? Hello?) :)
Now, I could, and probably will, try and figure out a way of implementing this, mostly because I really want the NSA (or CIA, hello?) to offer me a job filled with swashbuckling intrique. ;) HOWEVER, we have to keep in mind the practical limits of a decoding scheme that has 400 million possible combinations. I would imagine there is quite a good probability that at least one of these translations is the word "monkey" repeated 87 times.
In summation, damn you Stephen. ;)
Thanks, though, for catching this,
Adam
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 