[r-t] Cyclic principles

[King, Peter R]

I recently wrote a programme to generate major principles (because I
also think this is a neglected but potentially interesting area). I
rapidly came up with 100's of thousands of them (restrictions were:
symmetric methods with original lead ends, true in the plain course with
no 87's, lead length 30 changes (ie plain course of 240) because it's
similar in length to treble dodging methods). With regards Graham's
criteria:
1. Music, no problem. Here's one method 36.5-4.5-6.3.4.36.4-6.5- LH1 and
Method Master's musical analysis
 

2. Blue line. Well I've rung worse and I've rung better

3. Falseness. Here's the killer, and it seems to be common with the
other methods I looked at (I haven't analysed them all). These are the
false course heads that MM comes up with.




Needless to say I haven't yet come up with a composition, even computer
generated, although I can get 1/4 lenght compositions.  This does seem
to be a generic problem that these principles have horrendous falseness.
Doubtless if I search through the methods generated I could find some
more pleasant ones (Easton Neston for example, although it has a shorter
course). Are there some general rules that would lead to methods with
less falseness? If so what are they? Is this a lost cause?

 
Thanks,
 
Peter



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ringing-theory-bounces at bellringers.net
> [mailto:ringing-theory-bounces at bellringers.net
<mailto:ringing-theory-bounces at bellringers.net> ] On Behalf Of
> Graham John
> Sent: 02 May 2005 15:53
> To: ringing-theory at bellringers.net
> Subject: RE: [r-t] Cyclic principles
>
>
> Philip wrote;
>
> > Michael Wilby has sent me the following email about cyclic
> > principles. He told me that both he and Rod Pipe both feel that
> > nobody has really looked at even bell principles, possibly because
> > they don't seem to be as good as treble-dominated methods, but
> > this type of thing might be an interesting new avenue.
>
> I don't think it is true that nobody has looked at this, but
> it is true that
> there has been little progress. There is a wider issue with even bell
> principles, namely that it seems to be more difficult to get
> good results
> than has been the case with hunters.
>
> There are three key requirements people are looking for in a method or
> principle:-
>
> 1. Good musical properties in the plain course
> 2. Interesting / elegant / memorable blue line
> 3. Ability to produce a peal length composition including
> lots of music
>
> For methods, three out of three of these is frequently
> achieved. But, for
> principles, you get two of three, but all three (or even 2+3) seems
> remarkably difficult.  Can anyone suggest an explanation why
> treble-dominated methods should yield better results? Is it
> connected with
> the differential effect of having asynchronous cycles of work?
>
> With regard to cyclic, the wrap principles (see
> http://ringing.8bit.co.uk/cyclictable.html
<http://ringing.8bit.co.uk/cyclictable.html> ) showed great promise, but
> progress stalled through lack of good compositions and better
> lines, so none
> have been pealed.
>
> Graham
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ringing-theory mailing list
> ringing-theory at bellringers.net
> http://bellringers.net/mailman/listinfo/ringing-theory_bellringers.net
<http://bellringers.net/mailman/listinfo/ringing-theory_bellringers.net>

> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory/attachments/20050503/d9891262/attachment-0004.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: clip_image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5083 bytes
Desc: clip_image002.jpg
URL: <http://bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory/attachments/20050503/d9891262/attachment-0001.jpg>