c4countdown

For many who play Countdown, a common heuristic used to help solve conundrums is affix matching. In particular, looking for common prefixes (UN-, OVER-) and suffixes (-ING, -IEST).

I wanted to see to what extent this was useful and see whether conventional wisdom is accurate in this case. Using the set of Apterous conundrums (thanks Charlie) I wrote a program that looked at the number of conundrums that contain a given set of letters (say I, N, G) and compared this with the number of conundrums that began/ended with those letters (-ING in this case). So in effect it assesses the positives-to-decoys ratio.

I decided to post this here rather than in the Apterous subforum because I think the findings should have some use with respect to the show, with the caveat that heat game conundrums tend to have more common affixes than the whole Apterous set; finals (and CofC) game conundrums have less.

PREFIXES Also of interest might be the single-letter "prefixes" J (45% of 121), F (37% of 944), P (34% of 1727), W (33% of 652) and B (32% of 1296). Interestingly the letter N is the first letter of only 3% of the 4317 conundrums in which it appears. L, E, I, K, and O all sit around the 7% mark.

SUFFIXES Powerful single-letter "suffixes" include Y (70% of 1286), G (51% of 2220), D (49% of 2719) and E (22% of 5803). Avoid U (0.08% of 2384), V (0.1% of 715), and I (0.3% of 5145).


The next step would probably be an attempt at identifying letter modifiers to a prefix or suffix (e.g. perhaps the presence of the letter F increases the chance of an -ING ending to 85%, etc).
Another idea I've had is to take, for example, the 24% of words that contain I, N, G but do not end -ING. Perhaps there's a useful set of suffixes to check for ING-decoys. Some research into a blended strategy (if one tries both -ABLY and -ABLE what are the chances of success?) could also prove fruitful. But that's for another day.

Brilliant work. That's really interesting.

This is excellent. Well done!

Nice work. Some surprising finds at the top, although I wonder how many of these patterns good conundrumists would be subconsciously aware of. Questions about methodology:

* What minimum (if any) did you set on how many words each set of letters had to appear in?
* Did you do some kind of prefix elimination? (e.g. I'd expect SQU- to make the list if SQ- did.)

That is interesting... So when I got "Neighbour", it was doubly interesting as it starts with "N" and the ING is mixed up... Perhaps someone who's more alert than me at the moment can say what ended with "V"?

Kevin Thurlow wrote:That is interesting... So when I got "Neighbour", it was doubly interesting as it starts with "N" and the ING is mixed up... Perhaps someone who's more alert than me at the moment can say what ended with "V"?

Off the top of my head LEITMOTIV

Charlie Reams wrote: * What minimum (if any) did you set on how many words each set of letters had to appear in?

In the program itself I set no minimum. I had it go through the whole list once and record all "affixes" of up to 5 letters. So for COMPUTING, say, it recorded C, CO, COM, COMP, COMPU and G, NG, ING, TING, UTING (or incremented the counter for those that had already been seen before). Once I had my full list of these I then went through the whole list of affixes and for each conundrum in turn incremented a counter for words that included the letters of the affix in any place. So in the end I had a list of affixes, number of conundrums with that affix, and number of conundrums that contained the letters of the affix in any position.

My point is that all the raw data is available. For reporting I limited it to those affixes that have appeared 20 times or more in the set, which means they must represent at least 0.25% of all conundrums. If I didn't do this you would have some stuff like COMMU- at 100% of 7, MIDWI- at 100% of 4 and -ZZLED at 75% of 4.

Charlie Reams wrote: * Did you do some kind of prefix elimination? (e.g. I'd expect SQU- to make the list if SQ- did.)

Yes I did this by hand afterwards. The stats for SQU- and SQ- are identical as you might have assumed. There are lots of other things like -KING (34% of 101) and -LOGY (37% of 73) that make the list (209 prefixes and 249 suffixes occur at least 20 times in the set) but their inclusion above would probably obscure the useful results. There were no real surprises that I could see anyway, such as -NDING having a stronger correlation than -ING (it doesn't), so it would just make things confusing.


For those that are interested, I've uploaded the CSV file with the raw data here

That's very helpful, Clive!

Thank you!

Jason Larsen wrote:That's very helpful, Clive!

Thank you!

Normally when you do that, it's at least in response to some post in the same thread! Now we have to search the whole forum for the relevant post!

Gavin, I knew what I was talking about!

Jason Larsen wrote:Gavin, I knew what I was talking about!

But nobody else does, which is the idea of a forum.

I notice a lot of bio- conundrums, perhaps that could be included. Overall, though, and interesting set of statistics though.

Really?

Shaun Hegarty wrote:I notice a lot of bio- conundrums, perhaps that could be included. Overall, though, and interesting set of statistics though.

4% of 257.

As an accompaniment to the regular conundrums, here are the hyper conundrums:

PREFIXES Letters P (29% of 1270), W (26% of 160), D (26% of 1398), and F (25% of 511) are quite handy; N (2% of 3153), L (3% of 2403) and G (6% of 1510) are not.

SUFFIXES Letters worth looking at include Y (81% of 1144), G (52% of 1510) and D (37% of 1398) [next best is E with 16% of 3319]. Avoid I (0.1% of 3566), A (0.6% of 1924), X (0.7% of 130) and F (1% of 511).

A VFSMB to whoever correctly identifies the single hyper conundrum that ends in X.

Simon Myers wrote: A VFSMB to whoever correctly identifies the single hyper conundrum that ends in X.

PORTMANTEAUX?

Paul Howe wrote:

Simon Myers wrote: A VFSMB to whoever correctly identifies the single hyper conundrum that ends in X.

PORTMANTEAUX?

Indeed. Should've posted when I knew you weren't lurking around here Paul. Try the 4 that end in I, which are more challenging I think.

Simon Myers wrote:

Paul Howe wrote:

Simon Myers wrote: A VFSMB to whoever correctly identifies the single hyper conundrum that ends in X.

PORTMANTEAUX?

Indeed. Should've posted when I knew you weren't lurking around here Paul. Try the 4 that end in I, which are more challenging I think.

Ha, I think it's the first time I've logged in this weekend so you were quite unlucky!

I is harder, the only word that comes to mind atm is CARAVANSERAI? Sadly this will now be at the back of my mind for the rest of the evening.

Paul Howe wrote: I is harder, the only word that comes to mind atm is CARAVANSERAI?

No, that's not one of the four. I suppose you could also consider yourself unlucky; falling foul of Charlie's somewhat arbitrary judgement in selecting fair conundrums.

Simon Myers wrote:

Paul Howe wrote: I is harder, the only word that comes to mind atm is CARAVANSERAI?

No, that's not one of the four. I suppose you could also consider yourself unlucky; falling foul of Charlie's somewhat arbitrary judgement in selecting fair conundrums.

It was far from arbitrary, I selected exactly the conundrums I thought Paul Howe wouldn't be able to guess.

Charlie Reams wrote:

Simon Myers wrote:

Paul Howe wrote: I is harder, the only word that comes to mind atm is CARAVANSERAI?

No, that's not one of the four. I suppose you could also consider yourself unlucky; falling foul of Charlie's somewhat arbitrary judgement in selecting fair conundrums.

It was far from arbitrary, I selected exactly the conundrums I thought Paul Howe wouldn't be able to guess.

You did a good job!

On further reflection, -US to -I plurals look to be good candidates, so I'm going for:

STREPTOCOCCI (vague memories of being stumped by this on a hypernundrum attack)

and, less confidently,

STRATOCUMULI and CUMULOSTRATI, which at least have some google hits but could easily be cases of latinus malapropis

ELECTROPHORI?

Paul Howe wrote: STREPTOCOCCI

Yes.

Paul Howe wrote: STRATOCUMULI

Yes.

Paul Howe wrote: CUMULOSTRATI

No.

Phil Reynolds wrote:ELECTROPHORI

No.

Thanks Dinos




(for LEITMOTIV)

Simon Myers wrote:

Paul Howe wrote:

Simon Myers wrote: A VFSMB to whoever correctly identifies the single hyper conundrum that ends in X.

PORTMANTEAUX?

Indeed. Should've posted when I knew you weren't lurking around here Paul. Try the 4 that end in I, which are more challenging I think.

Right, I've been thinking about this non-stop for the last two months and still don't know the answer. Time to spill the beans, Myers.

Paul Howe wrote:Right, I've been thinking about this non-stop for the last two months and still don't know the answer. Time to spill the beans, Myers.

Ah yes. In all fairness the two you didn't get were nigh on impossible. They are:
APPARATCHIKI
GASTROCNEMII

I've finally got around to doing the newly added apterous conundrums. There are only about 1100 of these so I've lowered the threshold for inclusion to 6 instead of 20. Due to the smaller sample there are a few differences between this and the main list. When the two lists are interpolated, the actual difference made to the main stats changes very little (INGs change by about 1% for example).

PREFIXES SUFFIXES There are a whole bunch of 9 letter words that are conundrum-valid (have no anagrams, not plurals), around 3500, so sometime soon I might do the stats on those to see if there are any inherent biases in Charlie's conundrum selections.