Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It's a hard problem, for a bunch of reasons :)

1) It's not too hard to make a problem with at least one solution (just put the queens down first, then draw boxes), but there isn't any good way of making levels with unique solutions.

2) Once you've accomplished that, it's hard to predict how hard a level will be, and then it's hard to make levels easier / harder.

I happen to be currently researching this topic (well, I'm doing all kinds of these grid-based puzzles, but this is an example). The algorithm tries to make "good" levels, but there is a good probability it will end up with something useless we need to throw away, and then try again.

It's easy to make levels which are trivial, and similarly easy to make levels which are far beyond human ability, but hitting things in the 'human tricky but solvable' sweet-spot is where most of the difficulty comes from.

I should probably try writing up a human-readable version of how I do it. It involves a bunch of Rust code, so I can hit a whole bunch of trendy topics!






> I should probably try writing up a human-readable version of how I do it. It involves a bunch of Rust code, so I can hit a whole bunch of trendy topics!

Do you have a blog? I'm interested.


Given that this could be a variant of "exact cover", using zdds to explore the problem space might simplify finding exact puzzles in addition to puzzles that require lookahead.



Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: