Anyway, after that loss of data, I decided to post and update optimal catalyst forms here.
1. Boat vs Barge
- Run time comparison (1000 soups run)
I'm still not sure how I should interpret the data, though.
Should I compare the 'real' time or the 'user' time?
Which of the two is more meaningful? The difference or the ratio?Code: Select all
boat real 5m46.317s user 5m0.536s sys 0m2.108s barge real 4m8.638s user 3m2.784s sys 0m2.144s
- Result:
Boat - Barge = 51 reactions / 1000 soups
Barge - Boat = 6 / 1000
Code: Select all
x = 16, y = 6, rule = B3/S23
3o3b3o$obo3bobo$3o3b3o4bo$12bobo$13bobo$14bo!
Code: Select all
x = 31, y = 9, rule = LifeHistory
25.2A$4.2A18.A2.A$.2C2.A15.2C2.A.A$C.C2A15.C.C3A.2AC$C4.3A12.C9.C$.C
2A4.A12.C2A.3AC.C$3.A.3A15.A.A2.2C$3.A.A17.A2.A$4.A19.2A!
- Speed comparison
Unfortunately I accidentally closed the console after the search so I couldn't remember the exact values, but it was about 30m (monomer) vs 20m (dimer). - Result comparison
Monomer - Dimer = 3 / 1000 (The three were all due to steric hindrance. I didn't count junk noise; i.e. rock-tub reactions from the monomer form.)
Dimer - Monomer = nothing
3. Eater 5 monomer vs dimer (1000 soups)
Code: Select all
x = 24, y = 12, rule = LifeHistory
.2A3.C5.2A3.C$.A3.C.A4.A3.C.A$2.A3.2A5.A3.2A$3.A10.A$.A.5A4.A.4A.A.2A
$A.A4.A3.A.A4.2A.A.A$A.A.3A4.A.A.2A4.A.A$.2A.A7.2A.A.4A.A$20.A$16.2A
3.A$16.A.C3.A$17.C3.2A!
- Run time comparison:
Code: Select all
monomer real 30m31.850s user 27m40.392s sys 0m3.860s dimer real 30m43.314s user 28m20.192s sys 0m3.604s
4. Ship+Eater variant monomer vs dimer (100 soups)
I decided to check only 100 as it took too much time.
- Run Time:
Code: Select all
Monomer real 5m59.286s user 3m15.944s sys 0m0.432s Dimer real 4m29.057s user 2m38.988s sys 0m0.376s
5. The "rock eater2" monomer and dimer1 (100 soups)
Code: Select all
x = 37, y = 14, rule = LifeHistory
.A19.A$A3.2A14.A3.2A$.A3.A15.A3.A4.2A$2.3A2.2C.A11.3A2.2C2.A$7.2C.3A
14.2C.A$13.A16.A.A$5.4A.3A12.4A2.A.A$5.A3.2A14.A3.2A2.A$6.2A20.A2.2A
3.A$8.2A.A16.A.A2.4A$8.A.2A17.A.A$31.A.2C$30.A2.2C$30.2A!
- Run Time:
Code: Select all
monomer real 5m9.183s user 2m40.544s sys 0m0.768s dimer1 real 4m5.780s user 2m11.356s sys 0m0.480s
- Resuts:
monomer - dimer1 = 5 / 100 due to steric hindrance, but three are trivial reactions that are filtered by eater2, so I would say 2/100.
dimer1-monomer = None.
Code: Select all
x = 42, y = 14, rule = LifeHistory
.A22.A$A3.2A17.A3.2A$.A3.A4.2A12.A3.A$2.3A2.2C2.A13.3A2.2C.A2.A.2C$7.
2C.A19.2C.4A.2C$10.A.A$5.4A2.A.A14.4A.4A.4A$5.A3.2A2.A14.A3.2A2.2A3.A
$8.A2.2A3.A12.2A8.2A$8.A.A2.4A14.7A.A$9.A.A19.A2.A2.A.A$11.A.2C23.A$
10.A2.2C$10.2A!
- Runtime:
Code: Select all
dimer2 real 4m19.534s user 2m27.636s sys 0m0.400s dimer1 real 4m2.582s user 2m11.540s sys 0m0.452s
- Results: the second dimer form has 3 nontrivial reactions not found in the first form. Two of them can be filtered by an eater2 which makes 1/100. I didn't check the first form - second form as I am going to use the first form anyway.
I'm not sure how this is similar to a twit, but something sure does filter this. The frequency of this is very low, about 0.01. This is currently classified as uncommon.
Code: Select all
x = 38, y = 13, rule = B3/S23
28b2o6b2o$27bobo7bo$5b2o20bobob2ob3o$5bobo20bobobobo$7bo22bobo$3o4bob
2o12b3o4bobo$b2ob2obobo14b2ob2obob2o$5bobobobo16bobo$5bobo2b2o16bobo$
3bobobo18bobobobo$b3ob2o17b3ob2obobo$o22bo7bobo$2o21b2o6b2o!
- Speed
The dimer is pretty much faster than the monomer form.
Code: Select all
monomer real 7m9.915s user 3m33.728s sys 0m0.676s dimer real 5m19.030s user 3m8.820s sys 0m0.424s
- Results:
Monomer - dimer = 4 / 100 which is pretty big, considering the actual frequency.
Code: Select all
x = 17, y = 11, rule = B3/S23
5b2o3b2o$5bobobobo$7bobo$7bobo$4b2obobob2o$5bobobobo$5bobobobo$3bobobo
bobobo$b3ob2o3b2ob3o$o15bo$2o13b2o!