Cody

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon

1
Rank
40
Badges
30535
Score

Activities

1 – 50 of 5,350

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon submitted a Comment to Problem 44378. Five-dimensional maze

for a given location on the square the bits encode only the walls in the *positive* direction of each axis. For example, for a 2d maze the bits encode the presence of a wall wall in the "down" and "right" directions, respectively (but the ability to move "up" or "left" is determined by the presence of walls in the corresponding neighboring squares). In the 5d maze, a value of 31 means that you cannot move in the positive direction further in any dimension (i.e. this is a corner, but you may of course move in the negative direction in some dimensions, depending on the values of the neighboring squares)

1 hour and 56 minutes ago

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon submitted a Comment to Problem 44343. Pair Primes

there are quite a few look-up table solutions, could you perhaps add something like the following to the test suite to discourage these? assert(~any(cellfun(@(x)ismember(max([0,str2num(x)]),[51,2485,136162,8578934]),regexp(fileread('pairPrimes.m'),'[\d\.\+\-\*\/]+','match'))))

9 hours and 22 minutes ago

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon submitted a Comment to Problem 44349. Tick. Tock. Tick. Tock. Tick. Tock. Tick. Tock. Tick. Tock.

@elmar or moderator, please delete troll comment

12 hours and 40 minutes ago

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon submitted Solution 1303286 to Problem 44343. Pair Primes

23 hours and 33 minutes ago

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon submitted a Comment to Problem 44387. Birthday cake

great! one suggestion would be to add some cases with cake sides ratios between .45 and .55 but different than .5 to avoid solutions that hard-code the .5 case? (e.g. birthdaycandles(5,11) = 5.5204 ; birthdaycandles(12,23) = 12.2028). The behavior in that range seems most interesting, as the solution space seems to transition smoothly between the two "stable" configurations

on 20 Oct 2017 at 1:19

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon submitted a Comment to Problem 44316. Pandigital Multiples of 11 (based on Project Euler 491)

my mistake, my results now match those reported by Reggie, I get N(10)=1,454,400, N(11)=9,072,000, and N(14)=3,216,477,600.

on 19 Oct 2017 at 23:57

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon submitted a Comment to Problem 44316. Pandigital Multiples of 11 (based on Project Euler 491)

to add to the confusion, my (non-brute-force) approach leads to the following counts N(10)=2,246,400 N(11)=22,896,000 and N(14)=26,714,545,200

on 19 Oct 2017 at 21:41

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon submitted a Comment to Problem 44387. Birthday cake

I second David's suggestion

on 19 Oct 2017 at 16:47

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon submitted a Comment to Problem 44382. Parse me a Lisp

it seems look-up table solutions are becoming a bit of an issue, could you please add a few test cases to discourage this? +1 for random test cases that are a bit harder to trick, for example something like n=randi(100,1,randi(10)); expr = "(+" + string(num2str(n))+ ")"; assert(isequal(eval_lisp(expr), sum(n)));

on 19 Oct 2017 at 15:48

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon submitted a Comment to Problem 44377. Five steps to enlightenment

in test case 17 (with X,Y =[4,6,8,12,16,18]), the solution [4,18] is ruled out first in Step 2, because, if Priscilla was told that the product was 72 (this would have left her with only two options: [4,18] or [6,12] at that point), as soon as she heard in Step 1 that Scott does not know the solution she could immediately have ruled out [6,12] (because that would have resulted in Scott knowing the solution from the unique sum S=18), leaving her knowing the solution in Step 2, contrary to her assertion. Let me know if that clarifies. Just for completion, in test case 17, after Step 1 valid solutions are [4,16],[4,18],[6,16],[6,18],[8,12], or [8,16] (associated with sum S = 20, 22, or 24); after Step 2 valid solutions are [6,16], or [8,12] (associated with product P = 96); and after Step 3 the only possible solution is [6,16] (the other solution, [8,12], can be ruled out because if Scott was told that S=20 he could not have possibly dismissed the possibility of [4,16], which would have allowed Priscilla to know the answer immediately from the product P=64 alone). Let me know if this makes sense

on 19 Oct 2017 at 1:59

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon liked Solution 1292106

on 18 Oct 2017 at 19:02

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon liked Problem 44374. Tautology

on 18 Oct 2017 at 15:42

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon submitted a Comment to Solution 1297342

implicit expansion ftw!

on 18 Oct 2017 at 15:41

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon submitted a Comment to Problem 44372. Polarisation

@margreet: that is a good question, indeed. The following minutePhysics video talks about that: "Bell's Theorem: The Quantum Venn Diagram Paradox" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcqZHYo7ONs

on 18 Oct 2017 at 14:12

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon liked Solution 1294582

on 18 Oct 2017 at 5:14

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon submitted a Comment to Problem 44387. Birthday cake

well, this was harder than I was anticipating :)

on 18 Oct 2017 at 2:07

Alfonso Nieto-Castanon received Cody5:Easy Master badge

on 17 Oct 2017 at 15:36

1 – 50 of 5,350