Timeline for Truel extended to n persons
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 15, 2020 at 16:19 | vote | accept | Eric | ||
| Mar 4, 2017 at 16:59 | comment | added | D.W. | Nice insight! I've explained the dynamic programming algorithm in more detail at cs.stackexchange.com/a/71133/755. (Cc: @Eric) | |
| Dec 17, 2015 at 22:30 | comment | added | Robert Israel | You have to consider the survival probabilities (under optimal play) of each player given the set of initial players and whose turn it is. So if there are initially $n$ players, there are $\sum_{j=1}^n j {n \choose j} = n 2^{n-1}$ scenarios (set of players + whose turn). Not bad at all if $n = 10$, but $n=30$ would be challenging. | |
| Dec 17, 2015 at 1:27 | comment | added | Eric | @Robert: Can you tell us how you programmed it, more specificly? Whose death maximizes your probability of survive is so entangled with what all others do at each level that there're to much probabilities to specify or compute. | |
| Aug 4, 2011 at 2:16 | comment | added | Eric | @Robert: Thanks! I agree there's always a unique pure strategy for a player. And indeed with probabilities given, we can recursively determine everyone's optimal strategy. But this doesn't answer Quesiton 2 (which i've modified): Will the naive strategy always remain most players' optimal strategy as n gets larger? Or can we predict which players will always be able to adopt the naive strategy as optimal, as n gets larger? | |
| Aug 4, 2011 at 0:17 | history | answered | Robert Israel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |