View Full Version : Need Some Logic Here, I'm Stuck
05-29-2013, 03:45 PM
I should have known this would take a while. Average time was well over 2000 seconds. I'm looking for the next logical step, not a "What If".
Clues 2, 6, 7, 8 are all scratch-offs.
I cannot find any additional groups which exclude each other. I cannot find any groups that exclude everything else.
I have exhausted limiting OR statements. For example, in clue 4, we can place an X at "2019 and Bale-Hahn". From that point, we see that Dr. Morgan cannot be Lectra 4C, Tevatron LHC, 2016, or 2017. Similar OR statements can be found in clues 3, 5, 10.
I'm really stuck with this one. Anyone see the next logical step?
05-29-2013, 03:54 PM
Here's the puzzle with everything cleared out, if you want to try it from the beginning.
05-30-2013, 03:23 AM
From clues 1 and 9 we know that Oslo is before Zynga, and Ewing is before Bale-Hahn.
We also know that Zynga is Ewing.
So Oslo is before Bale-Hahn, and Oslo cannot be Bale-Hahn.
Now Oslo can only be Lectra or Tevatron.
From the grid, we see that Morgan can only be Bale-Hahn or Egert. Therefore, Morgan cannot be Oslo.
That sets up a "2 for 2" in the DC category box (where the researchers and locations intersect).
Dublin and Oslo can only be Salinas or Underwood. So we can place five Xs in the Athens, Madrid, and Stockholm rows. Now we're rolling.
Those five Xs load up the right half of clue 10 with extra Xs. The intersection of Athens and Salinas now tells us that Salinas can never be Madrid or Stockholm and Athens can never be Underwood.
Therefore the left side of clue 10 can never be Madrid or Stockholm or Underwood.
Since Egert can no longer be Madrid, Madrid must be Zynga and Ewing.
Everything falls into place after that.
If I didn't make a mistake, the solution is:
2016 - Tevatron - Chang - Stockholm
2017 - Lectra - Salinas - Oslo
2018 - Zynga - Ewing - Madrid
2019 - Egert - Morgan - Athens
2020 - Bale-Hahn - Underwood - Dublin
05-30-2013, 02:10 PM
Daisy chain of relationships! Sheesh. I missed that one. I worked it from that alone. Thanks. Pure logic was what I was looking for.
I was afraid there was yet another technique to learn with this one.
84,216 seconds to solve the puzzle. Well, that will screw with the odds on that one.
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.