Dynamic Programming Winning Strategy Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)Winning strategy for a matchstick gameAlways win without a winning strategyWinning or Non-losing strategy for A or BProve using a strategy stealing argument that player 1 has a winning strategy in the chomp gameWhat exactly is a strategy stealing game and is it bad?Winning strategy - nim variationIn his winning strategy, the first move of player 1 in an $n times n$ Chomp game must be $(2,2)$Given a square table $ntimes n$, two players $A$ and $B$ are playing the following game: …A game theory winning strategy problemWinning strategy for winning bucket-balls game.

How to write capital alpha?

Is there hard evidence that the grant peer review system performs significantly better than random?

What is the difference between a "ranged attack" and a "ranged weapon attack"?

Why not send Voyager 3 and 4 following up the paths taken by Voyager 1 and 2 to re-transmit signals of later as they fly away from Earth?

Why is a lens darker than other ones when applying the same settings?

How much damage would a cupful of neutron star matter do to the Earth?

Simple Http Server

Understanding p-Values using an example

Putting class ranking in CV, but against dept guidelines

Why is it faster to reheat something than it is to cook it?

How does the math work when buying airline miles?

Does silver oxide react with hydrogen sulfide?

Is it dangerous to install hacking tools on my private linux machine?

As a dual citizen, my US passport will expire one day after traveling to the US. Will this work?

Tips to organize LaTeX presentations for a semester

Flight departed from the gate 5 min before scheduled departure time. Refund options

Is multiple magic items in one inherently imbalanced?

How would you say "es muy psicólogo"?

GDP with Intermediate Production

Printing attributes of selection in ArcPy?

How to ternary Plot3D a function

Central Vacuuming: Is it worth it, and how does it compare to normal vacuuming?

Is there public access to the Meteor Crater in Arizona?

AppleTVs create a chatty alternate WiFi network



Dynamic Programming Winning Strategy



Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)Winning strategy for a matchstick gameAlways win without a winning strategyWinning or Non-losing strategy for A or BProve using a strategy stealing argument that player 1 has a winning strategy in the chomp gameWhat exactly is a strategy stealing game and is it bad?Winning strategy - nim variationIn his winning strategy, the first move of player 1 in an $n times n$ Chomp game must be $(2,2)$Given a square table $ntimes n$, two players $A$ and $B$ are playing the following game: …A game theory winning strategy problemWinning strategy for winning bucket-balls game.










0












$begingroup$


Describing A Game:
In the Game there are 2 players (player 1 and player 2)
and there is a board with a number of ball in it $n$.There is also a set $A =$$A1...Am$ which hold the amount of ball each player is allowed to remove in one move.



progress of the game: each player at his turn remove $ain A$ balls from the board.



loser: is a player who cannot remove $ain A$ form the board. Meaning the number of balls on the board is smaller than $a,$$forall a in A$ .



For example $A = $$2,3$ and $n=6$.
the first player remove 3 balls then the second player remove 2 balls and we are left with one ball on the board so the second player win.



Another example $A = $$2,3$ and $n=6$.
the first player remove 2 balls then the second player remove 2 balls.then the first player remove 2 balls then the second player is left with zero balls on the board so the first player win.



I can see that for each $A$ and $n$ there are 2 option: Player one has as Winning Strategey,or Player two has as Winning Strategey.



I can see it via a tree that I draw that represent a game. which spread from the root (player 1) to the second level (player 2) based on $a,$$forall a in A$ and so on.



Edit: I need to prove that for each $n$ and a set $A =$$A1...Am$
there exist one of the following situation:



  1. palyer 1 has a winning strategy.


  2. player 2 has a winning strategy.


But I find it hard to proof (via induction).










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$
















    0












    $begingroup$


    Describing A Game:
    In the Game there are 2 players (player 1 and player 2)
    and there is a board with a number of ball in it $n$.There is also a set $A =$$A1...Am$ which hold the amount of ball each player is allowed to remove in one move.



    progress of the game: each player at his turn remove $ain A$ balls from the board.



    loser: is a player who cannot remove $ain A$ form the board. Meaning the number of balls on the board is smaller than $a,$$forall a in A$ .



    For example $A = $$2,3$ and $n=6$.
    the first player remove 3 balls then the second player remove 2 balls and we are left with one ball on the board so the second player win.



    Another example $A = $$2,3$ and $n=6$.
    the first player remove 2 balls then the second player remove 2 balls.then the first player remove 2 balls then the second player is left with zero balls on the board so the first player win.



    I can see that for each $A$ and $n$ there are 2 option: Player one has as Winning Strategey,or Player two has as Winning Strategey.



    I can see it via a tree that I draw that represent a game. which spread from the root (player 1) to the second level (player 2) based on $a,$$forall a in A$ and so on.



    Edit: I need to prove that for each $n$ and a set $A =$$A1...Am$
    there exist one of the following situation:



    1. palyer 1 has a winning strategy.


    2. player 2 has a winning strategy.


    But I find it hard to proof (via induction).










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$














      0












      0








      0





      $begingroup$


      Describing A Game:
      In the Game there are 2 players (player 1 and player 2)
      and there is a board with a number of ball in it $n$.There is also a set $A =$$A1...Am$ which hold the amount of ball each player is allowed to remove in one move.



      progress of the game: each player at his turn remove $ain A$ balls from the board.



      loser: is a player who cannot remove $ain A$ form the board. Meaning the number of balls on the board is smaller than $a,$$forall a in A$ .



      For example $A = $$2,3$ and $n=6$.
      the first player remove 3 balls then the second player remove 2 balls and we are left with one ball on the board so the second player win.



      Another example $A = $$2,3$ and $n=6$.
      the first player remove 2 balls then the second player remove 2 balls.then the first player remove 2 balls then the second player is left with zero balls on the board so the first player win.



      I can see that for each $A$ and $n$ there are 2 option: Player one has as Winning Strategey,or Player two has as Winning Strategey.



      I can see it via a tree that I draw that represent a game. which spread from the root (player 1) to the second level (player 2) based on $a,$$forall a in A$ and so on.



      Edit: I need to prove that for each $n$ and a set $A =$$A1...Am$
      there exist one of the following situation:



      1. palyer 1 has a winning strategy.


      2. player 2 has a winning strategy.


      But I find it hard to proof (via induction).










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      Describing A Game:
      In the Game there are 2 players (player 1 and player 2)
      and there is a board with a number of ball in it $n$.There is also a set $A =$$A1...Am$ which hold the amount of ball each player is allowed to remove in one move.



      progress of the game: each player at his turn remove $ain A$ balls from the board.



      loser: is a player who cannot remove $ain A$ form the board. Meaning the number of balls on the board is smaller than $a,$$forall a in A$ .



      For example $A = $$2,3$ and $n=6$.
      the first player remove 3 balls then the second player remove 2 balls and we are left with one ball on the board so the second player win.



      Another example $A = $$2,3$ and $n=6$.
      the first player remove 2 balls then the second player remove 2 balls.then the first player remove 2 balls then the second player is left with zero balls on the board so the first player win.



      I can see that for each $A$ and $n$ there are 2 option: Player one has as Winning Strategey,or Player two has as Winning Strategey.



      I can see it via a tree that I draw that represent a game. which spread from the root (player 1) to the second level (player 2) based on $a,$$forall a in A$ and so on.



      Edit: I need to prove that for each $n$ and a set $A =$$A1...Am$
      there exist one of the following situation:



      1. palyer 1 has a winning strategy.


      2. player 2 has a winning strategy.


      But I find it hard to proof (via induction).







      algorithms game-theory dynamic-programming






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Apr 2 at 14:14







      נירייב שמואל

















      asked Apr 2 at 8:42









      נירייב שמואלנירייב שמואל

      386




      386




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          1












          $begingroup$

          I suspect that what you're actually need to prove is that, for each position of the game (represented by $n$, with the set $A$ fixed), either (1) there is a winning strategy for the player to move (the first player), or (2) for each move the first player has (if any), there is a winning strategy for the other player in the resulting position. This can indeed be proven by induction on $n$. When $n=0$, there are no moves for the first player; we are in the case (2). Suppose $n>0$. There are two possibilities: either there is a move for the first player that leads to a new position $n'$ for which the case (2) takes place (with players exchanged), or there's no such a move. The first possibility corresponds to the case (1) for $n$. The second corresponds to the case (2) for $n$, because either there are no moves at all, or each move leads to a position which is not in the case (2) and therefore - by induction! - is in the case (1); in both cases the first player loses.



          Back to the present game. The first player has a winning strategy with $n$ balls initially (on the board) if and only if there exists $ain A$ such that the (second) player doesn't have a winning strategy with $n-a$ balls initially. In other words, let $f(n)in0,1$ represent the existence of a winning strategy for the first player with $n$ balls initially (where $1$ means "exists"); if we "conveniently" assume $f(n)=1$ for $n<0$, then
          $$f(n)=negbigwedge_ain Af(n-a)quadtextfor ngeqslant 0$$
          (where $neg$ is logical "not" and $wedge$ is logical "and"). For your example $A=2,3$, you get
          $$(f(0),f(1),f(2),ldots)=(colorblue0,0,1,1,1,0,0,1,1,1,ldots)$$
          (a periodic sequence with the period shown in blue).






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            How can I prove that this is actually works?
            $endgroup$
            – נירייב שמואל
            Apr 2 at 14:00










          • $begingroup$
            I edited the question so it will be clear for you what I need to prove.
            $endgroup$
            – נירייב שמואל
            Apr 2 at 14:18






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            I've edited the answer... probably something's getting clarified ;)
            $endgroup$
            – metamorphy
            Apr 2 at 14:36











          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3171630%2fdynamic-programming-winning-strategy%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          1












          $begingroup$

          I suspect that what you're actually need to prove is that, for each position of the game (represented by $n$, with the set $A$ fixed), either (1) there is a winning strategy for the player to move (the first player), or (2) for each move the first player has (if any), there is a winning strategy for the other player in the resulting position. This can indeed be proven by induction on $n$. When $n=0$, there are no moves for the first player; we are in the case (2). Suppose $n>0$. There are two possibilities: either there is a move for the first player that leads to a new position $n'$ for which the case (2) takes place (with players exchanged), or there's no such a move. The first possibility corresponds to the case (1) for $n$. The second corresponds to the case (2) for $n$, because either there are no moves at all, or each move leads to a position which is not in the case (2) and therefore - by induction! - is in the case (1); in both cases the first player loses.



          Back to the present game. The first player has a winning strategy with $n$ balls initially (on the board) if and only if there exists $ain A$ such that the (second) player doesn't have a winning strategy with $n-a$ balls initially. In other words, let $f(n)in0,1$ represent the existence of a winning strategy for the first player with $n$ balls initially (where $1$ means "exists"); if we "conveniently" assume $f(n)=1$ for $n<0$, then
          $$f(n)=negbigwedge_ain Af(n-a)quadtextfor ngeqslant 0$$
          (where $neg$ is logical "not" and $wedge$ is logical "and"). For your example $A=2,3$, you get
          $$(f(0),f(1),f(2),ldots)=(colorblue0,0,1,1,1,0,0,1,1,1,ldots)$$
          (a periodic sequence with the period shown in blue).






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            How can I prove that this is actually works?
            $endgroup$
            – נירייב שמואל
            Apr 2 at 14:00










          • $begingroup$
            I edited the question so it will be clear for you what I need to prove.
            $endgroup$
            – נירייב שמואל
            Apr 2 at 14:18






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            I've edited the answer... probably something's getting clarified ;)
            $endgroup$
            – metamorphy
            Apr 2 at 14:36















          1












          $begingroup$

          I suspect that what you're actually need to prove is that, for each position of the game (represented by $n$, with the set $A$ fixed), either (1) there is a winning strategy for the player to move (the first player), or (2) for each move the first player has (if any), there is a winning strategy for the other player in the resulting position. This can indeed be proven by induction on $n$. When $n=0$, there are no moves for the first player; we are in the case (2). Suppose $n>0$. There are two possibilities: either there is a move for the first player that leads to a new position $n'$ for which the case (2) takes place (with players exchanged), or there's no such a move. The first possibility corresponds to the case (1) for $n$. The second corresponds to the case (2) for $n$, because either there are no moves at all, or each move leads to a position which is not in the case (2) and therefore - by induction! - is in the case (1); in both cases the first player loses.



          Back to the present game. The first player has a winning strategy with $n$ balls initially (on the board) if and only if there exists $ain A$ such that the (second) player doesn't have a winning strategy with $n-a$ balls initially. In other words, let $f(n)in0,1$ represent the existence of a winning strategy for the first player with $n$ balls initially (where $1$ means "exists"); if we "conveniently" assume $f(n)=1$ for $n<0$, then
          $$f(n)=negbigwedge_ain Af(n-a)quadtextfor ngeqslant 0$$
          (where $neg$ is logical "not" and $wedge$ is logical "and"). For your example $A=2,3$, you get
          $$(f(0),f(1),f(2),ldots)=(colorblue0,0,1,1,1,0,0,1,1,1,ldots)$$
          (a periodic sequence with the period shown in blue).






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            How can I prove that this is actually works?
            $endgroup$
            – נירייב שמואל
            Apr 2 at 14:00










          • $begingroup$
            I edited the question so it will be clear for you what I need to prove.
            $endgroup$
            – נירייב שמואל
            Apr 2 at 14:18






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            I've edited the answer... probably something's getting clarified ;)
            $endgroup$
            – metamorphy
            Apr 2 at 14:36













          1












          1








          1





          $begingroup$

          I suspect that what you're actually need to prove is that, for each position of the game (represented by $n$, with the set $A$ fixed), either (1) there is a winning strategy for the player to move (the first player), or (2) for each move the first player has (if any), there is a winning strategy for the other player in the resulting position. This can indeed be proven by induction on $n$. When $n=0$, there are no moves for the first player; we are in the case (2). Suppose $n>0$. There are two possibilities: either there is a move for the first player that leads to a new position $n'$ for which the case (2) takes place (with players exchanged), or there's no such a move. The first possibility corresponds to the case (1) for $n$. The second corresponds to the case (2) for $n$, because either there are no moves at all, or each move leads to a position which is not in the case (2) and therefore - by induction! - is in the case (1); in both cases the first player loses.



          Back to the present game. The first player has a winning strategy with $n$ balls initially (on the board) if and only if there exists $ain A$ such that the (second) player doesn't have a winning strategy with $n-a$ balls initially. In other words, let $f(n)in0,1$ represent the existence of a winning strategy for the first player with $n$ balls initially (where $1$ means "exists"); if we "conveniently" assume $f(n)=1$ for $n<0$, then
          $$f(n)=negbigwedge_ain Af(n-a)quadtextfor ngeqslant 0$$
          (where $neg$ is logical "not" and $wedge$ is logical "and"). For your example $A=2,3$, you get
          $$(f(0),f(1),f(2),ldots)=(colorblue0,0,1,1,1,0,0,1,1,1,ldots)$$
          (a periodic sequence with the period shown in blue).






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          I suspect that what you're actually need to prove is that, for each position of the game (represented by $n$, with the set $A$ fixed), either (1) there is a winning strategy for the player to move (the first player), or (2) for each move the first player has (if any), there is a winning strategy for the other player in the resulting position. This can indeed be proven by induction on $n$. When $n=0$, there are no moves for the first player; we are in the case (2). Suppose $n>0$. There are two possibilities: either there is a move for the first player that leads to a new position $n'$ for which the case (2) takes place (with players exchanged), or there's no such a move. The first possibility corresponds to the case (1) for $n$. The second corresponds to the case (2) for $n$, because either there are no moves at all, or each move leads to a position which is not in the case (2) and therefore - by induction! - is in the case (1); in both cases the first player loses.



          Back to the present game. The first player has a winning strategy with $n$ balls initially (on the board) if and only if there exists $ain A$ such that the (second) player doesn't have a winning strategy with $n-a$ balls initially. In other words, let $f(n)in0,1$ represent the existence of a winning strategy for the first player with $n$ balls initially (where $1$ means "exists"); if we "conveniently" assume $f(n)=1$ for $n<0$, then
          $$f(n)=negbigwedge_ain Af(n-a)quadtextfor ngeqslant 0$$
          (where $neg$ is logical "not" and $wedge$ is logical "and"). For your example $A=2,3$, you get
          $$(f(0),f(1),f(2),ldots)=(colorblue0,0,1,1,1,0,0,1,1,1,ldots)$$
          (a periodic sequence with the period shown in blue).







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Apr 2 at 14:38

























          answered Apr 2 at 13:26









          metamorphymetamorphy

          3,8721721




          3,8721721











          • $begingroup$
            How can I prove that this is actually works?
            $endgroup$
            – נירייב שמואל
            Apr 2 at 14:00










          • $begingroup$
            I edited the question so it will be clear for you what I need to prove.
            $endgroup$
            – נירייב שמואל
            Apr 2 at 14:18






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            I've edited the answer... probably something's getting clarified ;)
            $endgroup$
            – metamorphy
            Apr 2 at 14:36
















          • $begingroup$
            How can I prove that this is actually works?
            $endgroup$
            – נירייב שמואל
            Apr 2 at 14:00










          • $begingroup$
            I edited the question so it will be clear for you what I need to prove.
            $endgroup$
            – נירייב שמואל
            Apr 2 at 14:18






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            I've edited the answer... probably something's getting clarified ;)
            $endgroup$
            – metamorphy
            Apr 2 at 14:36















          $begingroup$
          How can I prove that this is actually works?
          $endgroup$
          – נירייב שמואל
          Apr 2 at 14:00




          $begingroup$
          How can I prove that this is actually works?
          $endgroup$
          – נירייב שמואל
          Apr 2 at 14:00












          $begingroup$
          I edited the question so it will be clear for you what I need to prove.
          $endgroup$
          – נירייב שמואל
          Apr 2 at 14:18




          $begingroup$
          I edited the question so it will be clear for you what I need to prove.
          $endgroup$
          – נירייב שמואל
          Apr 2 at 14:18




          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          I've edited the answer... probably something's getting clarified ;)
          $endgroup$
          – metamorphy
          Apr 2 at 14:36




          $begingroup$
          I've edited the answer... probably something's getting clarified ;)
          $endgroup$
          – metamorphy
          Apr 2 at 14:36

















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3171630%2fdynamic-programming-winning-strategy%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Boston (Lincolnshire) Stedsbyld | Berne yn Boston | NavigaasjemenuBoston Borough CouncilBoston, Lincolnshire

          Trouble understanding the speech of overseas colleaguesHow can I better understand manager or clients with strong accents?Adding more movement and speech at the fundamental level to a highly-sedentary job?Difficulty in understanding Manager's accent(language and communication)How to adjust yourself where your colleagues are not understanding to you?Understanding manager's expectationsForeigner and colleagues using slangHaving difficulty understanding meetingsHow do you breathe when giving a speech?Trouble Waking Up for Emergencies (On-Call)Problems with colleaguesColleagues feeling insecure when I do my work

          Ballerup Komuun Stääden an saarpen | Futnuuten | Luke uk diar | Nawigatsjuunwww.ballerup.dkwww.statistikbanken.dk: Tabelle BEF44 (Folketal pr. 1. januar fordelt på byer)Commonskategorii: Ballerup Komuun55° 44′ N, 12° 22′ O