Cuts Calculation Optimiser
ASO Keyword Dashboard
Tracking 109 keywords for Cuts Calculation Optimiser in Google Play
Cuts Calculation Optimiser tracks 109 keywords (no keywords rank yet; 109 need traction). Key metrics: opportunity 69.6, difficulty 46.4.
Make Simple and Smarter Cuttings
Tracked keywords
109
0 ranked • 109 not ranking yet
Top 10 coverage
—
Best rank — • Latest leader —
Avg opportunity
69.6
Top keyword: reduce
Avg difficulty
46.4
Lower scores indicate easier wins
Opportunity leaders
- 68.5
reduce
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 52.0 • Rank —
Competitors: 913
- 68.3
mobile phone
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 48.3 • Rank —
Competitors: 983
- 68.6
material
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 43.7 • Rank —
Competitors: 658
- 68.3
input
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 52.7 • Rank —
Competitors: 830
- 67.5
tracks
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 54.7 • Rank —
Competitors: 1,717
Unranked opportunities
reduce
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 52.0 • Competitors: 913
mobile phone
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 48.3 • Competitors: 983
material
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 43.7 • Competitors: 658
input
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 52.7 • Competitors: 830
tracks
Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 54.7 • Competitors: 1,717
High competition keywords
make
Total apps: 163,352 • Major competitors: 21,922
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 65.0
like
Total apps: 150,415 • Major competitors: 21,531
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 68.5
best
Total apps: 131,644 • Major competitors: 18,001
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 63.2
using
Total apps: 114,758 • Major competitors: 13,323
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 64.0
mobile
Total apps: 113,294 • Major competitors: 10,537
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 60.5
All tracked keywords
Includes opportunity, difficulty, rankings and competitor benchmarks
| Major Competitors | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| best | 65 | 100 | 63 | 87 131,644 competing apps Median installs: 43,740 Avg rating: 2.9 | — | — | 18,001 major competitor apps |
| art | 70 | 100 | 56 | 74 21,686 competing apps Median installs: 37,108 Avg rating: 3.1 | — | — | 3,077 major competitor apps |
| make | 64 | 100 | 65 | 89 163,352 competing apps Median installs: 42,108 Avg rating: 3.0 | — | — | 21,922 major competitor apps |
| phone | 67 | 100 | 69 | 83 75,756 competing apps Median installs: 37,780 Avg rating: 3.0 | — | — | 9,010 major competitor apps |
| whether | 67 | 100 | 58 | 83 76,585 competing apps Median installs: 31,919 Avg rating: 2.9 | — | — | 8,596 major competitor apps |
| designed | 66 | 100 | 57 | 85 96,808 competing apps Median installs: 27,484 Avg rating: 2.8 | — | — | 9,110 major competitor apps |
| enhance | 69 | 100 | 55 | 77 30,373 competing apps Median installs: 33,880 Avg rating: 3.0 | — | — | 3,622 major competitor apps |
| list | 69 | 100 | 57 | 78 39,078 competing apps Median installs: 31,139 Avg rating: 2.8 | — | — | 3,448 major competitor apps |
| avoid | 71 | 100 | 61 | 72 16,708 competing apps Median installs: 44,275 Avg rating: 2.9 | — | — | 2,344 major competitor apps |
| using | 65 | 100 | 64 | 86 114,758 competing apps Median installs: 37,480 Avg rating: 2.8 | — | — | 13,323 major competitor apps |
| available | 66 | 100 | 66 | 85 92,463 competing apps Median installs: 34,120 Avg rating: 2.9 | — | — | 9,952 major competitor apps |
| mobile | 65 | 100 | 60 | 86 113,294 competing apps Median installs: 25,796 Avg rating: 2.8 | — | — | 10,537 major competitor apps |
| perfect | 66 | 100 | 61 | 84 81,756 competing apps Median installs: 38,510 Avg rating: 3.0 | — | — | 10,774 major competitor apps |
| streamlines | 70 | 100 | 33 | 52 1,112 competing apps Median installs: 15,766 Avg rating: 2.6 | — | — | 56 major competitor apps |
| combination | 72 | 100 | 49 | 66 7,537 competing apps Median installs: 45,010 Avg rating: 3.1 | — | — | 1,101 major competitor apps |
| arrangement | 69 | 100 | 32 | 50 865 competing apps Median installs: 25,468 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 64 major competitor apps |
| helping | 72 | 100 | 48 | 71 14,477 competing apps Median installs: 28,866 Avg rating: 2.9 | — | — | 1,392 major competitor apps |
| efficient | 71 | 100 | 54 | 72 16,594 competing apps Median installs: 15,694 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 1,185 major competitor apps |
| craft | 72 | 100 | 57 | 66 7,430 competing apps Median installs: 78,826 Avg rating: 3.3 | — | — | 1,446 major competitor apps |
| smart | 68 | 100 | 63 | 80 46,851 competing apps Median installs: 34,670 Avg rating: 2.9 | — | — | 5,609 major competitor apps |
| run | 70 | 100 | 57 | 74 21,776 competing apps Median installs: 53,680 Avg rating: 3.1 | — | — | 3,447 major competitor apps |
| minimum | 72 | 100 | 47 | 65 6,312 competing apps Median installs: 46,880 Avg rating: 2.8 | — | — | 809 major competitor apps |
| easier | 70 | 100 | 62 | 75 25,194 competing apps Median installs: 31,651 Avg rating: 2.8 | — | — | 2,581 major competitor apps |
| tool | 69 | 100 | 53 | 78 38,943 competing apps Median installs: 28,037 Avg rating: 2.9 | — | — | 3,793 major competitor apps |
| managing | 71 | 100 | 49 | 72 15,473 competing apps Median installs: 19,742 Avg rating: 2.6 | — | — | 1,239 major competitor apps |
App Description
Make Simple and Smarter Cuttings
Our algorithm, designed for optimizing the use of a fixed-size container (like a wall) while minimizing waste, takes as input the container size (wall size) and a list of available item lengths. It diligently explores different item combinations, minimizing the number of cuts required to fit the items. At each step, it selects the item that best fits the remaining space using the "Best-Fit" strategy. This smart algorithm tracks the minimum cut count, the item arrangement (best cut), and the waste generated. It also employs memoization for faster calculations and to avoid repeating the same computations. This algorithm is invaluable in real-world scenarios such as logistics, manufacturing, and resource allocation, where efficient space utilization is crucial.
Mobile Convenience, On-Demand Efficiency: Run our app on your mobile phone whenever you need it.
Here are a couple of examples:
Example 1 (Bin Size: 17 units): You have rods of lengths 2 and 3 units. The algorithm tells you that you need 5 rods of length 3 (5 * 3 = 15) and 1 rod of length 2. This combination perfectly fills the 17-unit bin.
Example 2 (Bin Size: 16 units): With the same rods and a 16-unit bin, the algorithm suggests using 5 rods of length 3 (5 * 3 = 15) and 1 rod of length 2. In this case, the waste is minimized, resulting in only 1 unit of unused space.
This algorithm is invaluable in real-world scenarios such as logistics, manufacturing, and resource allocation, where efficient space utilization is crucial. Whether you're framing art for exhibitions or managing construction materials, our "Best-Fit Bin Packing" tool streamlines your work, ensuring you get the best value out of your resources.
Optimize, Cut, Repeat - Anytime, Anywhere
Worldwide Target Users:
Carpenters: Optimize your wood usage.
Construction Workers: Efficiently use building materials.
Manufacturers: Reduce material waste.
Frame Cutters: Craft perfect frames for art exhibitions.
Craftsmen: Enhance your resource utilization.
Fabricators: Cut material
