> I compared the times with your PR's method

Thanks for doing this comparison.

> and yours is faster but it is further from being simplified.

That is what I did expect. Simplification is not a (primary)
goal in my code. It does the matrix  stuff and tells you that
this thing here is a solution. That's all.

For the interactive use, simplified results are of course
better. Maybe even internally getting simpler results would
be good. (But at the moment it is not necessary)

> Simplification takes about 1.5 minutes.

Hmm, ok. Maybe some non-generic simplification would be faster.
Anyway, most people just call "simplify" and hope for the best.

> The op count for the 5 solutions before and after simplifying are
> [165, 181, 207, 249, 158, 155]
> [251, 269, 295, 339, 246, 150]
> 
> Using the "quick" methods gives the following and only takes 40
> seconds to make the simplification:
> [164, 148, 138, 135, 203, 196]
> [171, 154, 147, 146, 343, 206]
> 
> It's interesting that the last two of the quick results are larger
> than those of your PR.