# Revamped OLL section in alg database



## danthecuber (Feb 13, 2011)

I was very bored today and I was looking in the alg database at the OLLs, and there were only 22 out of the 57 cases there, and only 5 to 10 algs for each case that was there. So, having a lot of time on my hands, I copied every alg from the wiki OLL page and the BOCA alg database. Enjoy the revamped OLL section!
*cough* PLL next? *cough*


----------



## AvGalen (Feb 13, 2011)

Really, there were only 22 of th 57 cases there? If so, that was a MASSIVE update!

"and now the OLL section is a shadow of its former self" means that the new version is worse than the old version though (shadow is less good than original)


----------



## Ranzha (Feb 13, 2011)

I don't think that having a page with a thousand ways to solve a double headlights case is necessary. >_<


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 13, 2011)

Ranzha V. Emodrach said:


> I don't think that having a page with a thousand ways to solve a double headlights case is necessary. >_<


 
I know, but if you check any of the bottom 50 OLLs (cross not oriented) there are a lot less algs for each case. The 7 ones with the cross oriented just happened to have an exponentially greater number of algs. And it gives people more of a choice when choosing algs for their own solves.


----------



## FatBoyXPC (Feb 13, 2011)

Whether it is necessary or not: kudos on doing all that work. I'll be honest in that I just go to the wiki page for OLL/PLL to grab the algs, but if we can make the use of the Algorithm Database the place to go, that would be awesome. There was a thread awhile back on cleaning up the OLL/PLL pages (too many algs per case), and I suppose this is one way we could do that. Either way, again, kudos for all that work.


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 13, 2011)

fatboyxpc said:


> Whether it is necessary or not: kudos on doing all that work. I'll be honest in that I just go to the wiki page for OLL/PLL to grab the algs, but if we can make the use of the Algorithm Database the place to go, that would be awesome. There was a thread awhile back on cleaning up the OLL/PLL pages (too many algs per case), and I suppose this is one way we could do that. Either way, again, kudos for all that work.


 
Thanks. Also, its important to point out that the alg database actually checks whether the alg is correct before it gets entered. The wiki, on the other hand, does not get check, so an incorrect alg can sneak in every so often. Take for example, U2 R L' U' L U R' U' L' U L U2 r U R' U' L' U R U'from the wiki PLL page. The wiki says its an E-Perm, from looking at the animation, you can tell that it needs an extra rotation to be a real E-Perm. Also, algs uploaded into the database stay there forever, they can never get removed. So, because of those two reasons, I think it's better if we move all of the algs from the wiki to the alg database, in the long term. Maybe we could even steal some algs from BOCA just to add some more algs. There are A LOT of algs there. So, just some food for thought


----------



## MichaelP. (Feb 13, 2011)

You never know when you'll need a 29 move headlights algorithm.


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 13, 2011)

MichaelP. said:


> You never know when you'll need a 29 move headlights algorithm.


 
Well, it's an *Algorithm Database*, not a predictor of what algoritm you're going to use/need. I believe you're able to make that decision for yourself.


----------



## FatBoyXPC (Feb 13, 2011)

Michael makes a strong point...


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 13, 2011)

fatboyxpc said:


> Michael makes a strong point...


 
Yeah, but btw did you notice that #22 and #37 are the same cases?
edit: #27 and #60 also! and also #21 and #40!
can a mod plz fix this, because it looks like the algs are correct, but the corresponding case is not. There are 57 in total, so if those pictures are fixed, then all of the cases will all be there.


----------



## Anthony (Feb 13, 2011)

Wait, so you spent time adding the countless number of algs like L2 U L' R2 U' R2 U L U L2 U L2 U R2 U' R2 U' R2 U2 L2 R2 U' L2 U' L2 U' R2 U R2.

Seriously?
That's insane. Literally insane considering those are utterly useless.


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 13, 2011)

Anthony said:


> Wait, so you spent time adding the countless number of algs like L2 U L' R2 U' R2 U L U L2 U L2 U R2 U' R2 U' R2 U2 L2 R2 U' L2 U' L2 U' R2 U R2.
> 
> Seriously?
> That's insane. Literally insane considering those are utterly useless.


 
I spent time, but not that much. I could copy and paste 30 algs at a time, so I could do 180 algs a minute if I was working fast.
Anyway, no one can change it now, because any upload to the algorithm database is set in stone, unlike for the rest of wiki. (yes the database is part of the wiki)


----------



## Pyjam (Feb 13, 2011)

danthecuber said:


> Enjoy the revamped OLL section!


I added an alg for the case #45 (Mickey's head) recently : y2 (R' F R F') U2 (R' F R F') (U F' U F)
It isn't in the revamped OLL page yet.


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 13, 2011)

Pyjam said:


> I added an alg for the case #45 (Mickey's head) recently : y2 (R' F R F') U2 (R' F R F') (U F' U F)
> It isn't in the revamped OLL page yet.


 
I added it, but all of the old algs should still be there regardless of what I do to the database. It isn't editable. Are you sure you added it?


----------



## Pyjam (Feb 13, 2011)

I added it in the OLL Wiki page a couple of days ago, not in the revamped one, as you just did it.


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 13, 2011)

Pyjam said:


> I added it in the OLL Wiki page a couple of days ago, not in the revamped one, as you just did it.


 
No, the Algorithm database and the wiki are too separate things. The one I updated is the algorithm database. The most important difference is that the algs in the wiki are not verified to be correct and can be edited, whilst the Database algs are verified and can't be edited or removed. Since you put the alg in only the wiki, it won't automatically be in the algorithm database, you have to add it to there manually.

I would like to inform everyone that the PLL section is now also revamped! I used the same resources as I did for the OLL section. While every case was covered before I added any algs, there were only 3 to 5 for each case. With these new algs, every case has double, even sometimes triple or quadruple, the amount of algs that were there before. Enjoy!

*I strongly reccommend using the database instead of the wiki to look for algs as every alg is verified to be correct in the database, whereas the wiki does not verify its algs*


----------



## AvGalen (Feb 14, 2011)

Less is more


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 14, 2011)

AvGalen said:


> Less is more


 
I realize this, but what if there were no algs for a particular case (like there were for most of the olls), would less still be more?


----------



## JustinJ (Feb 14, 2011)

danthecuber said:


> I realize this, but I think the database is more useful, if it has more algs.
> What if there were no algs for a particular case (like there were for most of the olls), would less still be more?


 
Are you serious? Like, actually?


----------



## Cyrus C. (Feb 14, 2011)

If there are going to be that many algorithms should we implement a voting system similar to BOCA's?

A lot of the algs are just the same with different rotations. I counted 9 variants of the same Headlights algorithm that were just different executions without scrolling at all.


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 14, 2011)

Cyrus C. said:


> If there are going to be that many algorithms, should we start a voting system like BOCA?
> 
> A lot of the algs are just the same with different rotations. I counted 9 variants of the same Headlights algorithm that were just different executions without scrolling at all.


 
Please check the bottom 50 algorithms, which have much smaller number of cases. See if that is the case for one of them. Also, try looking at a PLL case to see if it is the case for one of them as well.
BTW, nothing can be done about the algs I uploaded, like it or not, they can't be removed


----------



## Cyrus C. (Feb 14, 2011)

danthecuber said:


> Please check the bottom 50 algorithms, which have much smaller number of cases. See if that is the case for one of them.
> Also, try looking at a PLL case to see if it is the case for one of them as well.




I chose the last one case. The first 4 of 5 algorithms are R U R' U' R' r U R U' r', R U R' U' r R' U R U' r', R U R' U' M' U R U' r', R' U' R U M U' R' U r.



danthecuber said:


> BTW, nothing can be done about the algs I uploaded, like it or not, they can't be removed



You make a good point, something should be done about this.

Although, I guess if all the good algs stay at the top there isn't too much of a problem having the useless ones at the bottom.


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 14, 2011)

Cyrus C. said:


> Although, I guess if all the good algs stay at the top there isn't too much of a problem having the useless ones at the bottom.



I'd have to agree because, some troll could remove every alg then, and that would be bad
The whole point of the alg database is so that all algs entered into it would be secure and correct. The wiki can't necessarily say that.

Also, the algs are sorted by move count, and most people use algs with low move counts, so it would't be too hard to find a useful alg. The wiki doesn't sort algs either. Those are just some of the many practical advantages of using the database over the wiki.


----------



## JustinJ (Feb 14, 2011)

danthecuber said:


> I'd have to agree because, some troll could remove every alg then, and that would be bad
> The whole point of the alg database is so that all algs entered into it would be secure and correct. The wiki can't necessarily say that.


Do you know how a wiki works? When people vandalize it, you can roll back the changes and have them banned.

Having this many algs is completely pointless. Nobody will ever make use of 95% of them.


----------



## FatBoyXPC (Feb 14, 2011)

The OLL wiki had algorithms for every case last time I checked. I got a decent amount of my OLL algs from the OLL wiki page.


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 14, 2011)

fatboyxpc said:


> The OLL wiki had algorithms for every case last time I checked. I got a decent amount of my OLL algs from the OLL wiki page.


 
I never said that it didn't



JustinJ said:


> Do you know how a wiki works? When people vandalize it, you can roll back the changes and have them banned.
> 
> Having this many algs is completely pointless. Nobody will ever make use of 95% of them.


 
Then the wiki is for you. You still have a choice... to make based on your personal preference, although I hope I have made it clear that mine is the alg database.


----------



## amostay2004 (Feb 14, 2011)

I agree with danthecuber, it is an algorithm *database*, so there's nothing wrong with having a crazy amount of algs. If you're not willing to sift through so many to look for a good one, go to the wiki instead. Take a look at the BOCA website for example, people seem to just copy paste from Cube Explorer for some of the cases.

Also I personally would like to see the same algs from different angles/fingertricks because I may not have thought of some of them. Of course there will be stupid ones like R U R' U' R' r U R U' r', R U R' U' r R' U R U' r', R U R' U' M' U R U' r', etc but hey you can't have everything right? The best thing is to just have them all and you can decide which ones are good.


----------



## badmephisto (Feb 16, 2011)

/facepalm .If you want an algorithm database, I can dump cube-explorer generated solutions to every single case for you. You will have thousands and thousands of them, why not put them all up? It's a database!

I suggest a separate page where only the most common algorithms are listed. In most cases, people tend to use 2 or at most 3 variations. It's true.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Feb 16, 2011)

This is disturbing.
At the most, we need ten algs for each case.

Shall we have a voting system as to what ten be kept? This is just...too much.


----------



## danthecuber (Feb 16, 2011)

off topic: Welcome back to the forums Badmephisto

on topic: The ~10 most common algs already are in the Wiki. There is no point of having the alg database if its just going to have the same algs as the wiki does.


----------



## FatBoyXPC (Feb 16, 2011)

Yes, but there is a point where too much is too much. Such as the 29 move headlight solution already mentioned.


----------



## amostay2004 (Feb 17, 2011)

badmephisto said:


> /facepalm .If you want an algorithm database, I can dump cube-explorer generated solutions to every single case for you. You will have thousands and thousands of them, why not put them all up? It's a database!
> 
> I suggest a separate page where only the most common algorithms are listed. In most cases, people tend to use 2 or at most 3 variations. It's true.


 Of course, the downside of having a database is people can just dump CE algs into it, but of course we're hoping people don't do that and actually submit useful algs. There will always be useless algs, but is it too hard to simply ignore them if we don't like it? You'll never know when some crazy dude actually develops fingertricks for weird algs and actually get fast with it, or they play around with ridiculously long algs and actually find some interesting tricks. If everyone just use what is 'common' then there will be less innovation and variety.

And I agree with having another page to list most common algs, to help the noobs pick their algs. I think the wiki algs should just be filtered to have common/fast ones, and if people are actually looking for the database, they can go to that. 

There's nothing wrong with having too many choices, ignoring the useless ones is not all that hard.


----------



## Pyjam (Feb 28, 2011)

I can't find OLL 54 (of the wiki) in the OLL database, the symmetric of #53 (of the db).

I found an algo for it : y f (R U R' U') (R U R' U') f' F (R U R' U') F'
(quite boring sure, but easy to remember)


----------



## danthecuber (Mar 1, 2011)

Yah I already addressed this there are three duplicate pictures, *21 and 40*, *22 and 37*, and *27 and 60*. All of the cases are there you might have to look in 37, 40, and 60 though, because I'm pretty sure those are the cases with the incorrect pictures. I asked Cride5 about this, but since there are complex algorithms that run the algorithm database, there is no easy fix.

If you have an alg and want to find its case, then enter it into the single alg upload page, and the picture will represent the corresponding case, whether the upload was successful or not.

BTW I uploaded that case you posted and it successfully uploaded to case 40, so that's your answer.


----------



## Chickenman (Mar 1, 2011)

I think we should make a survey to fill out that shows one oll and then lists the algs and people choose which alg they use and use those results to modify the wiki and if we can get them listed in order of most used to least used. I will make the survey if people will fill it out


----------



## Pyjam (Mar 1, 2011)

danthecuber said:


> If you have an alg and want to find its case, then enter it into the single alg upload page, and the picture will represent the corresponding case, whether the upload was successful or not.
> 
> BTW I uploaded that case you posted and it successfully uploaded to case 40, so that's your answer.


 
Thank you.


----------

