This is a different 'connect the dots' puzzle.

Your task is to connect the blue nodes in the map below with links such that the created network guides a signal emitted from the red triangle to the green pentagram.
It is required that the signal visits each node exactly once.
(There is no restriction with respect to links. They may or may not be used by the signal.)

The following rules apply:


  • You may create as many links as you wish.

  • The first and the last link (drawn in orange) are fixed and can not be removed.

  • A link has to connect two nodes in a straight line.

  • Links have to leave nodes radially.
    (If you prolong the line it has to go through the centre.)

  • Links must not cross each other at any point.

  • Links must not 'touch' any other node.

  • Links and nodes have the dimensions as in the original map.
    (They are not mathematical points and lines.)
    Line-width is ~4 pixels
    Node diameter is ~32 pixels

  • Examples for valid and invalid links are:

    Valid and invalid links
    (valid; invalid because crossing; invalid because touching other node; invalid because not radial)


  • The signal travels along a link from one node to the next node.
  • The moment the signal arrives at a node, the signal strength is increased by one.
  • Once a signal has arrived at the node it moves clockwise for as many outgoing links as its strength indicates. (It may do full circles multiple times.)
    i.e. for a strength of 3, the signal would leave the node via the 3rd link after the one it came from.
  • The signal is emitted from the red triangle with a signal strength of zero.
  • The following images illustrate the signal movement:
    signal starting at red triangle

    enter image description here

    enter image description here

The map

The Map

I do know that at least one solution exists, but I guess there might be more than one. In your answer, when possible, please give details on how you solved the puzzle or which general (useful) insights you've gained.

  • $\begingroup$ If the signal approaches a node from link A, and the signal's strength becomes 2, and the only links connected to the node are link A and link B... Does the signal go backward through link A? i.e. when a signal "does a full circle", does it count the link from which it came or no? $\endgroup$ – EFrog Jan 21 '15 at 22:42
  • $\begingroup$ I found a solution (I think). If you can tell me how to imbed an image and put it within a spoiler, I'll post it. $\endgroup$ – EFrog Jan 21 '15 at 23:31

My Solution (by hand):

enter image description here

My Findings & Strategies:

  1. The signal leaves the node at the exit that is "s mod n" turns clockwise from where it entered; where s is the signal strength, n is the number of connections to the node and "mod" is the modulus (remainder of the division).

  2. The signal may not travel back the way it came from, since it would visit a node it already visited. Hence a node must have at least two connections, except for the start (triangle) and end (pentagram) nodes.

  3. Nodes having and odd signal strength are simpler. Since "s mod 2" is always 1 for an odd s, which means the signal leaves the other path, if there is only one other path! However, this only works as long as there are two connections!

  4. Nodes with even signal strength must have a connection count which the signal strength can't be divided by. Else "s mod n" would be 0, which (according to 1.) means: The signal travels back where it came from.

  5. The highest possible connection count without crossing the existing connections or touching other nodes is 13 (tried by hand). These are the maximum number of connections for each node: A: 7, B: 8, C: 8, D: 10, E: 11, F: 11, G: 13, H: 13, I: 9, J: 10, K: 9, L: 13, M: 9, N: 10, O: 7. However, connections between other nodes might reduce this number, as crossing connections are not allowed.

  6. There are 15 nodes to visit (with strength 1,2,3, ..., 15). Their only possible connection counts (according to 4.) are therefore: Node#1: >2 | Node#2: >1, but not 2 | Node#3: >1, but not 3 | Node#4: 3, >4 | Node#5: >1, but not 5 | Node#6: 4, 5, >6 | Node#7: >1, but not 7 | Node#8: 3, 5, 6, 7, >8 | Node#9: 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, >9 | Node#10: 3, 4, , 7, 8, 9, >10 | Node#11: >1, but not 11 | Node#12: 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 3 Node#13: >1, but not 13 | Node#14: 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 | Node#15: 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13

  7. The most critical nodes are therefore #12 and #6, as they have a high minimum connection count of 5 and 4 respectively. It might be beneficial to connect them together. Also using nodes G, H or L for them could be a good idea since they can achieve the highest possible number of connections in the given topology.

  8. To reduce complexity, it also makes sense to minimize the number of connections. Using only the minimum of 2 connections for odd nodes should therefore be prefered. Instead additionally needed connections for the other nodes, should be made between those who need connections.

  9. To find all feasible solutions, I would first plan the additional connections between the nodes identified by their signal strength order. That means by totally ignoring the topology in the first place. This already decides if their interconnection counts are valid. For each valid solution one can then try to find a mapping of the signal strength numbered nodes to the nodes in the topology. The maximums from step 6. will help pre-checking valid mappings. The surviving ones need to be drawn to check for crossings and touches.

  10. However, to find one solution, I just tried to find a path in a kind of spiral along the outer rim then "somehow" to the goal node "J". I used my knowledge about minimum connection counts. I started at "B" and tried my way forward, avoiding to make any connections to already visited nodes, as theses might change their validity. Knowing which other nodes in a pre-planned path (in the topology) needed more connections helped a lot to speed the things up.

Insights by using a computer program

I wrote a computer program that can find all solution to this problem. However, it seems there are still challenges to solve here. Note, that there are lot's of valid solutions to the obove problem... I'm not going to post them here, because I want you to have a chance to find your own solution by hand without someone arguing "Haha! You just copied it from overthere...". Anyway, here are some more insights.


I used a vector graphics program to edit the original image to estimate the positions of all nodes with subpixel acuracy. To do this I added a layer obove the image and put a circle of 32 pixels diameter on it, which I moved ontop of each node. I zoomed in and made sure that the fading out border line of the original circles were homogeneous all around it. Then I noted down the coordinate the circle object had: START = (192.3, 694.9), GOAL = (534.7, 143.8), A = (18.4, 613.4), B = (196.4, 573), C = (300.3, 599.4), D = (604.7, 625.6), E = (268, 487.1), F = (362.8, 439.4), G = (99.7, 336.1), H = (313.8, 318.2), I = (371, 351.6), J = (549.8, 304.1), K = (26.7, 222.6), L = (272.9, 188.8), M = (450.6, 190.6), N = (37.1, 25.5), O = (595.4, 30.6). The image has a size of 622x715 pixels.

Finding all allowed interconnections:

For finding the allowed interconnections, I went through all 2-node-combinations with ID(node1) < ID(node2). This ensured I get only undirectional links. To check if there are collisions with other nodes, I used a modified point to line distance formula. Other nodes must be more than the radius of a node (16 pixels) and half the line width (2 pixels) away from the line. However, I needed to modify the line formula to also compute the position of that nearest point on the line. As a line through nodes "H" and "M" gets very near to "O" if it is seen mathmatically as an infinite line. Hence, it needs to be checked if the collission is between the two nodes that are connected. Since this computation takes some time, it's beneficial to precompute all possible interconnections. The result is this image: full interconnections with crossings. Note that two of the connections are not usable, since they cross the connection from the Start to node B. Also note, that the Start and End can be approximated by circles too, as there are no connections that are going by too close to them to cause any trouble. For other node positions this might however by different!

Finding all connection crossings:

The same was done for the crossings of connection. I used a formula for line intersections for this. I used one which calculates "u" and "t" as the position of the crossing on the lines. This time we need to check, if the crossing is on both of the connections tested. Also if using the "u" and "t" checking for >= 0 and <= 1 also finds a collission if the two connections share one point! So either check for >= 0.001 and <= 0.999 or test if any node is used by both connections in test. When now adding the initial connections manually and showing all possible interconnections left we get: full interconnections with crossings

Optimizations on collissions:

As this is time consuming, I also precalculated a collission table. This holds all connections that would collide, if I use one special connecton. Instead of checking this list over and over again, I maintained a list of all possible connections that can still be made and a list of connections that were used so far. When progressing and choosing one of the usable connections, it is added to the list of used connections and removed from the available connection list. Also all colliding connections are removed by using the precalculated table. Hence, we can just pick one connection from the 'available' list. When going recursively backwards, this change to the lists must be restored...

Intermediate solutions when ignoring the rules on how the signal follows the connections:

The next step was to just visit every node, before reaching node "J". This time ignoring the rules how the signal would travel, but not allowing crossing connections. I used a list of nodes that must still be visited and initialized it with all nodes from A to O and started the search at "B", which automatically removed "B" from the "toVisit" list. Then from there it recursively tried all possible combinations, which surprisingly didn't take too long (~3 minutes) even I just used a very inefficient programming language (PHP) in terms of speed. I chose it because producing images with it is very simple. It only found 45255 solutions, which was also surpring me. The original Traveling Salesman Problem problem would have taken ages and find millions or billions of solutions. But it seems that not being allowed to cross any connection, that was traveled before, speeds up the process extremely and at the same time reduces the number of solutions.

Implementing signal path rules:

At first glance it seemed really challenging to implement this rule in a computer, since you would need to go through all connections that are used, calculate angles... in the right direction (always the direction pointing from the current node visited away), order them and then somehow estimate which is the first, second and so on. How could that be solved quickly? -- I already had the list of all possible interconnections. Hence, I could go through all nodes in advance and calculate the angle for each connection that leaves them. To calculate the angles the atan2(dy,dx) function is very helpful! Then all connections for each node are stored in a list, ordered by the angle. It doesn't matter which angle it starts. If we later want to estimate the path followed by the signal, we go through that list for the current node we are at and follow the order it is in! We create a new list storing any connections that are "used" so far, in the order we find them. Also we note down the list index of the connection we used to get to this current node as indexEntered, which will always be contained in this list... then as the list index starts by 0, we can simply calculate index = (indexEntered + signalStrength) % length(list) to get the exit node.

Simple approach:

Now we not only need to add the links we want to follow, but also some links that ensure the signal goes the way we want it to go. As it was so quick to find the 45255 solutions for all the pathes without crossing connections, but ignoring the signal strength rule, I used a simple approach: At each node I tried trough all the permutations of still allowed connections originated from that node. To do that, I estimated the number $n$ of connections from the 'available' list that are related to the current node. Then I cycled through the $2^n$ possiblities, knowing that this quickly becomes a high number but hoping that using lots of connections would also cause most of that possibilities would very quickly die out in the near progress having to many connections in the way to reach other nodes. It worked, but it's very slow. So far it found 269 solutions having searched less than 1% of the problem space. Looking at those solutions showed a further insight: Solution 262 Solution 267. Even if the path the signal takes stays the same, there can be multiple solutions!

Finding all solutions faster:

As cycling though all that permuations seems to bee too slow, it might be much faster to find those 45255 solutions for just visiting all nodes (ignoring how the signal would flow) first and then add additional connections to make the signal flow as we want. This is one of the strategies I used to find my solution by hand. However, there is another strategy we could use to speed things up: the rule about the number of connections that need to be there to not make the signal flow backwards; I decided to find/store the 45255 intermediate solutions which took 34 minutes. That was 10 times slower than last time, most probably because I also generated the compressed *.png files. However, I can now cycle through those intermediate solutions and try to resolve them. Also I can do statistics on how many of them finally had real solutions and so on.

Final Results:

As far as my program is correct, there are 34834 real solutions. My new program needed ~88 minutes to find them (and save results inkl. images) by using the intermediate solutions. Only 553 out of the 45255 intermediate solutions have at least one real solution. This means just finding a random path without crossings to the goal has only a ~1,22% chance of success. However, most pathes that have a solution have really many of them. Only 23 of the 553 have only one real solution. The intermediate solution with the most final solutions is depicted following image. It has 1806 solutions... just by varying the "unused connections". Solution 262 Note that I'm not supplying all solutions here, so you can solve the puzzle yourself and find any of the other over 34800 solutions that were not shown here so far!

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ nice answer, but "it is required that the signal visits each node exactly once" (as is written in the first paragraph) $\endgroup$ – Hugh Dec 6 '18 at 23:09
  • $\begingroup$ Oh, forgot that one! Thank's for quick check! ;-) I'll refine my solution, if possible. $\endgroup$ – SDwarfs Dec 6 '18 at 23:16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Have edited my solution. Many more insights and hopefully now a correct solution... $\endgroup$ – SDwarfs Dec 7 '18 at 2:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Aren't you failing at note 8 now? (A 2-line connected note will only work on odd values.) But I like that your answer lists findings as well as just a "solution". $\endgroup$ – BmyGuest Dec 7 '18 at 8:46
  • $\begingroup$ BTW, I love the fact that you did pick up the puzzle anew despite it being "solved" aleady. Real sportsmanship. And welcome to the site! $\endgroup$ – BmyGuest Dec 7 '18 at 8:52

For me it was just a lot of trial and error. The only real "strategy" I had was trying to stick to the outermost nodes as much as possible. Other than that, the fact that a signal with an odd-number strength lets you pass directly through a previously unvisited node helps. (All lines are links. Purple lines trace the actual path of the signal.)

enter image description here

  • $\begingroup$ Yes, that does it well done. (And fast!). Do you have comments on the puzzle in general? (Enjoyable? Or boring? Hard? Or Easy?...) I had the idea yesterday night, and I have ideas to expand on it. But I wanted to get some "feedback" from puzzle-lovers first. Not all my ideas are bright ones :c) $\endgroup$ – BmyGuest Jan 21 '15 at 23:41
  • $\begingroup$ @BmyGuest I enjoyed it. I like puzzles that don't require special knowledge or outside resources. I don't think it was easy, I think I just got lucky lol. It might be interesting if, for example, a circle node had to be visited exactly once while a triangle node had to be visited exactly twice. $\endgroup$ – EFrog Jan 22 '15 at 0:12

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.