On 11/14/94 at 23:41:00 Dik.Winter@cwi.nl said:

You mean: F2 U3 D2 L3 D3 R1 U2 B2 R1 B2 R3 D1 L1 D3 R2 U1 D3 (or rather
its inverse)?  Took Kociemba's algorithm 10 minutes.  I do not yet
know whether this is minimal.

Are you applying Kociemba's algorithm to the <U,R> antipodal positions
in the context of <U,R> or in the context of G? The lengths of these
antipodal positions are already known to be minimal in <U,R>.
However (and obviously), the length in <U,R> can only be claimed to
be an upper bound for the length in G without further testing in G.

 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Robert G. Bryan (Jerry Bryan)              (304) 293-5192
Associate Director, WVNET                  (304) 293-5540 fax
837 Chestnut Ridge Road                     BRYAN@WVNVM
Morgantown, WV 26505                        BRYAN@WVNVM.WVNET.EDU

If you don't have time to do it right today, what makes you think you are
going to have time to do it over again tomorrow?