Wordle Lovers - Play the NYT Daily Game

[kuruman]

Wordle 1,227 3/6

 

[Orodruin]

Lots of things going on today, almost forgot to play….

Wordle 1 227 4/6






Streak still strong at solving Wordle 552 days in a row.

 

[OmCheeto]

Wordle 1,227 3/6

 

[dwarde]

Wordle 1,227 5/6

 

[ChaseLess]

Wordle 1,228 4/6

 

[Orodruin]

Wordle 1 228 3/6





Edit: I was left with TULIP or TUNIC after the first. I randomized wrong …

 

[kuruman]

Wordle 1,228 3/6

 

[jack action]

Wordle 1,228 3/6

[NURSE] 8 left: AUNTY BUNNY FUNKY JUNTA JUNTO MUNCH PUNCH TUNIC
[TACKY] filter -1 left
[TUNIC]

 

[gmax137]

Wordle 1,228 4/6






After my third word I was stumped, even though I had all six letters (C I T U N). So I went and fixed breakfast. Came back and saw the answer right off.

 

[Orodruin]

six letters

I think I found your problem …

 

[gmax137]

I think I found your problem …

Oops!

 

[OmCheeto]

Wordle 1,228 3/6

 

[dwarde]

Down the rabbit hole again.
Wordle 1,228 6/6

 

[gmax137]

After my problem seeing the word (given all 5 letters), I made an Excel sheet to do the permutations. I wish I could say I used a clever formula to develop the permutations, but instead I brute forced the four-letter permutations, then used some moderately clever cut&paste to come up with all 120. Good thing it's five not six letters, the 6 letter 720 perms would have been more than I would take on. So next time I know 5 letters I will be ready, lol.

 

[ChaseLess]

Wordle 1,229 4/6






#GuessTheMovie #28

#SceneSeeker
https://guessthemovie.name/p/28

 

[Orodruin]

Wordle 1 229 3/6





Only one possibility after the two seed words…

 

[gmax137]

Wordle 1,229 3/6





I felt pretty good getting this one in three

 

[jack action]

Wordle 1,229 3/6

[STRAY] 17 left
[LEUCH] filter - 2 left: EASEL FALSE
[EASEL] most probable

 

[Orodruin]

Wordle 1,229 3/6

[STRAY] 17 left
[LEUCH] filter - 2 left: EASEL FALSE
[EASEL] most probable

How on Earth is EASEL more probable than FALSE? FALSE feels like a significantly more common word in my book.

 

[jack action]

How on Earth is EASEL more probable than FALSE? FALSE feels like a significantly more common word in my book.

It is not about how common it is but how more likely a human would choose it; especially one selecting a word for the common man doing a puzzle to relax.

Spoiler

FALSE has a negative connotation. EASEL is more neutral. It even makes you think about a relaxing hobby: painting.

Here are the type of images that pops up when searching for those words on DuckDuckGo:

Which one do you find more relaxing, inviting, and positive?

 

[Orodruin]

It is not about how common it is but how more likely a human would choose it; especially one selecting a word for the common man doing a puzzle to relax.

Spoiler

FALSE has a negative connotation. EASEL is more neutral. It even makes you think about a relaxing hobby: painting.

Here are the type of images that pops up when searching for those words on DuckDuckGo:

View attachment 352882
View attachment 352883
View attachment 352884
View attachment 352885​

Which one do you find more relaxing, inviting, and positive?

That if anything is conjecture. I would select a more common word like FALSE as making a more relaxed game as casual users are more likely to find it. Additional connotations may come in relevant but only at a secondary level.

 

[jack action]

I would select a more common word like FALSE as making a more relaxed game as casual users are more likely to find it.

Yet, in this case ...

I'll keep selecting the right answer more often than not until proven otherwise.

 

[kuruman]

Wordle 1,229 3/6

 

[Orodruin]

Yet, in this case ...

View attachment 352889​

I'll keep selecting the right answer more often than not until proven otherwise.

That’s not how science works. You are the one making the hypothesis that you can select the correct answer more often than random selection would. You have yet to actually prove this.

 

[OmCheeto]

Wordle 1,229 4/6

 

[jack action]

That’s not how science works. You are the one making the hypothesis that you can select the correct answer more often than random selection would. You have yet to actually prove this.

• This is how science works.
• Yes, I am making a hypothesis.
• I am in the process of proving it. (Will it work? Nobody knows.)
• This is why I'm showing my selection process at every game. I do not state facts, I state my reasoning for selecting my words.
• It has gone really well up until now. (Can you imagine that my program suggested - quasi-randomly^[1] - FALSE as a filter word for the 2-word list EASEL and FALSE? It is far from being the first time I won that bet.)
• I cannot go faster than NYT publishes a new puzzle because it is only with them that this hypothesis would work. (Because the basis of my hypothesis is that a [very biased] human selects every solution.)

---

[1] The program removed all letters already found in each word and ordered the remaining letters by count. In this case, all letters were removed from EASEL and only F appeared in FALSE. It then parsed the list of possible answers (2 words, in this case) to see if a word contained all the remaining letters (in this case, only F) and, obviously, FALSE was the only possibility.

If there weren't any words in this list, it would have parsed the complete list of words to find appropriate filter words for as many as possible remaining letters, starting with the most popular ones.

 

[Orodruin]

I am in the process of proving it. (Will it work? Nobody knows.)

Then don't make statements like this

I'll keep selecting the right answer more often than not until proven otherwise.

until you have proven it conclusively with reasonable methodology at a reasonable confidence level.

 

[dwarde]

Wordle 1,229 4/6

 

[jack action]

Then don't make statements like this

until you have proven it conclusively with reasonable methodology at a reasonable confidence level.

So I'm supposed to NOT use a methodology to prove a hypothesis BEFORE I can prove the hypothesis works? How do I do that? It doesn't seem very scientifiky. Again, I don't make statements, I think out loud and share with people.

Just to inform you in advance, if somehow I find out along the way that it doesn't work, I'll change my methodology without any notice. Whether it works or not, don't expect an article published in a scientific journal either.

All I know is that when I'm stuck with selecting between two words, my human brain must have a thought process to do so. I would gladly ask you how you do it, but I won't go down that road again.

This is for fun. I don't think PF will be sued because someone followed my methodology to solve NYT Wordle and lowered their statistics because of it.

To quote you:

Your insistence on this is getting tiresome.

 

[Orodruin]

So I'm supposed to NOT use a methodology to prove a hypothesis BEFORE I can prove the hypothesis works?

No, that is not what I said. Please read what I am saying instead of making allegations. What I said was that you should not claim it is on others to prove your hypothesis wrong. What you are supposed to do is to collect sufficient data to support your claim before you unequivocally state that you are definitely selecting the correct answer more often than others.