News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Long out of math, an AI programmer cracks a pure math problem. Parent comment

Re:Long out of math, an AI programmer cracks a pure math pro... by fizzynut on Tuesday January 03, 2023 @06:56PM (#34239889)
I'm not sure why you say it won't work with 14 balls, this is solvable with up to 27 balls in 3 weighs.

Weigh 1: 9 vs 9 (18 on balance), 9 off

Weigh 2: 3 vs 3 (6 on balance ), 3 off

Weigh 3: 1 vs 1 (2 on balance ), 1 off

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Long out of math, an AI programmer cracks a pure math pro... by hello_hny on Tuesday January 03, 2023 @07:01PM (#34239924)
You don't know if the unique ball is heavier or lighter, how would this work?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Long out of math, an AI programmer cracks a pure math pro... by fizzynut on Tuesday January 03, 2023 @07:13PM (#34240017)
Ah, if you need to know that for certain then you'd be restricted to 18 balls (6,6,6), (2,2,2), (1,1). Otherwise I guess you would "only" know in 26/27 cases if it was heavier or lighter (off the balance in all 3 conditions).

....and now I understand, you would only initially know there is a difference in weight, not which side had the heavier or lighter ball.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Long out of math, an AI programmer cracks a pure math pro... by hgsgm on Wednesday January 04, 2023 @09:42AM (#34246008)
No, you can't solve the harder version with 18 balls, as you just proved.

18 balls have 36>27 states.

[ Parent | on HN ]