Timeline for Strategic vs. tactical closure
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 5, 2022 at 3:26 | history | edited | Joel David Hamkins | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added remark about coding strategies.
|
| Dec 5, 2022 at 2:49 | comment | added | Steven Clontz | Yes, I think the terminology "coding strategy" is quite standard as I'm not sure I've ever seen a proof that turned perfect information into "nearly tactical" information without an encoding of the game's history. | |
| Dec 5, 2022 at 2:45 | comment | added | Joel David Hamkins | I agree with that. | |
| Dec 5, 2022 at 2:43 | comment | added | bof | On the other hand the term "$k$-tactic" has been used for a strategy which relies on the opponent's last $k$ moves, and that seems a more natural notion. In general, it seems that a strategy is best thought of as a function of the opponent's moves. It may not be a necessary feature, but in practice "nearly tactical" strategies seem to use one's move to encode information about the history of the play. | |
| Dec 4, 2022 at 23:15 | comment | added | Joel David Hamkins | Thank you, bof, this is helpful. But although it may be good to know this terminology for finding articles, I think I prefer my terminology as more apt. A strategy is tactical if it depends only on the previous move, and nearly tactical if it depends on the previous two moves. Note that one can consider tactical and nearly tactical strategies without the moves necessarily coding anything at all. | |
| Dec 4, 2022 at 21:35 | comment | added | bof | As an aid in searching, it may be helpful to know that your "nearly tactical" strategies are also called "coding strategies" as in jstor.org/stable/2275110 | |
| Dec 4, 2022 at 13:57 | history | answered | Joel David Hamkins | CC BY-SA 4.0 |