Solver “24” Online: Best Tools and ImplementationsThe “24” game is a simple-looking but intellectually rich arithmetic puzzle: given four numbers (typically 1–9), use addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division to combine them so the result equals 24. The puzzle’s friendliness to both humans and computers has made it a popular programming exercise, a classroom activity for teaching order of operations and fractions, and a playground for algorithmic improvements. This article surveys the best online solvers, explains common implementation approaches, compares trade-offs, and offers guidance for choosing or building a solver suited to your needs.
What an Online “24” Solver Should Do
A solid online solver typically supports:
- Input flexibility: accepting integers, decimals, or fractions; allowing repeated numbers; and supporting alternative set sizes (3, 5, etc.).
- Operator support: the four basic operators (+, −, ×, ÷) and sometimes exponentiation, concatenation, or factorial.
- Solution output: one or all valid expressions, optionally simplified or formatted for readability.
- Performance: near-instant responses for single puzzles; scalability when solving bulk or random sets.
- Explainability: steps or evaluation order, to help users learn rather than just get answers.
- Edge-case handling: division by zero, floating-point precision, and equivalence of different expressions.
Common Implementation Approaches
Below are the main algorithmic strategies used by online solvers, with pros and cons.
| Approach | How it works | Pros | Cons |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brute-force enumeration | Generate all permutations of numbers and all binary expression trees with operators; evaluate expressions | Simple to implement; guarantees all solutions | Explodes combinatorially for larger sets or expanded operators |
| Backtracking with pruning | Recursively combine numbers into intermediate results, prune using bounds or commutativity rules | Faster than raw brute force; memory-light | Requires careful pruning rules to be efficient |
| Reverse Polish Notation (RPN) generation | Enumerate valid RPN strings for numbers/operators and evaluate | Systematic, maps cleanly to evaluation stack | Still combinatorial; needs de-duplication |
| Symbolic reasoning (algebraic) | Use symbolic manipulation to avoid floating-point error and reason about equivalence | Exact results; can identify mathematically equivalent expressions | More complex to implement; heavier computationally |
| Heuristics / Monte Carlo search | Randomized or guided search for likely expressions (useful for larger search spaces) | Can find solutions quickly in practice | No guarantee to find all solutions; probabilistic |
| SAT/SMT encoding | Encode arithmetic expressions as constraints and use a solver | Very powerful for complex rules; leverages optimized solvers | Overkill for simple 24 game; encoding is nontrivial |
Best Online Solvers & Tools (as of 2025)
Below are representative categories of tools and specific examples you can try. (This list highlights typical capabilities; availability and features may change.)
- Interactive web apps: Many websites host small JavaScript solvers that let you type numbers and instantly see solutions. They are typically based on brute-force or backtracking JavaScript implementations for speed in the browser.
- Open-source projects: GitHub repositories often provide implementations in Python, Java, or C++. These are good if you want to study the code or adapt it.
- Mobile apps: There are iOS/Android apps that include solvers and practice modes. They trade off features for polish and offline availability.
- Libraries and code snippets: Small npm packages, Python PyPI modules, and single-file scripts for teaching or embedding in other projects.
- Research/advanced tools: Implementations using symbolic math libraries (SymPy) or constraint solvers (Z3) that handle exact reasoning and extended operator sets.
If you want exact links or repo names, tell me whether you prefer web apps, code repos, or mobile apps and I’ll fetch up-to-date options.
Design Details: How to Build a Fast, Accurate Solver
-
Input normalization
- Convert fractions to a rational representation (numerator/denominator) to avoid floating-point error.
- Reject or handle zeros where division is used.
-
Search strategy
- Use recursive pairwise combination: pick two numbers a and b from the list, replace them with each result of a±b, a×b, and a÷b (if valid), then recurse on the reduced set.
- Apply commutativity and symmetry pruning: for addition and multiplication, avoid duplicate permutations by enforcing an ordering (e.g., only use a ≤ b for those operators).
- Early termination when a solution equals 24 exactly.
-
Expression tracking
- Alongside numeric values, keep the expression strings or expression trees to produce readable outputs.
- Optionally simplify parentheses using operator precedence when converting trees to strings.
-
Rational arithmetic
- Implement arithmetic on rational pairs (p, q) with reduction by gcd to ensure exact comparisons to 24 (i.e., check p/q == ⁄1).
-
Dedupe & canonicalization
- Normalize expressions so mathematically identical solutions (a+b vs b+a) are recognized and optionally filtered.
-
Performance tweaks
- Memoize intermediate multisets of numbers to avoid repeated computation.
- Precompute operator outcomes for integer pairs when applicable.
- Parallelize across permutations or use bitmask encodings for sets.
Example: Python Backtracking Skeleton
from fractions import Fraction from itertools import combinations, permutations def solve_24(nums): nums = [Fraction(n) for n in nums] results = set() def helper(values, exprs): if len(values) == 1: if values[0] == Fraction(24): results.add(exprs[0]) return n = len(values) for i in range(n): for j in range(i+1, n): a, b = values[i], values[j] ea, eb = exprs[i], exprs[j] next_vals = [values[k] for k in range(n) if k!=i and k!=j] next_exprs = [exprs[k] for k in range(n) if k!=i and k!=j] ops = [ (a+b, f"({ea}+{eb})"), (a-b, f"({ea}-{eb})"), (b-a, f"({eb}-{ea})"), (a*b, f"({ea}*{eb})"), ] if b != 0: ops.append((a/b, f"({ea}/{eb})")) if a != 0: ops.append((b/a, f"({eb}/{ea})")) for val, exp in ops: helper(next_vals + [val], next_exprs + [exp]) helper(nums, [str(n) for n in nums]) return results Choosing the Right Solver or Implementation
- For learning or teaching: prefer implementations that show step-by-step solutions and use rational arithmetic (Python with Fraction, or JavaScript with rational libs).
- For embedding in web pages: choose a compact JavaScript backtracking solution with pruning.
- For performance at scale: use memoization, bitmask encodings, and consider server-side implementations in compiled languages or vectorized algorithms.
- For exploring variants (extra operators, more numbers): opt for symbolic or SMT-based approaches to manage growing complexity.
Common Extensions & Variants
- Larger sets (5+ numbers) or different target values.
- Allowing concatenation (e.g., combining 1 and 2 into 12).
- Adding operators: exponentiation, factorial, roots.
- Time-limited or randomized puzzle generators for training.
Troubleshooting & FAQs
- Floating-point errors: use rational numbers or tolerant comparisons with an epsilon.
- Missing solutions: check pruning logic and ensure commutative cases aren’t incorrectly excluded.
- Performance issues: profile which part of the search tree dominates and add memoization or tighter pruning.
If you want, I can:
- Provide a browser-ready JavaScript solver you can paste into a web page.
- Fetch current online solver links and active open-source repositories.
- Implement optimizations (memoization, canonicalization) in Python or JavaScript for you.
Leave a Reply