Small improvements
This commit is contained in:
parent
73e8b52379
commit
60d09f8199
|
@ -26,13 +26,13 @@ On each move, the player has to remove
|
|||
and the player who removes the last stick wins the game.
|
||||
|
||||
For example, if $n=10$, the game may proceed as follows:
|
||||
\begin{enumerate}[noitemsep]
|
||||
\begin{itemize}[noitemsep]
|
||||
\item Player $A$ removes 2 sticks (8 sticks left).
|
||||
\item Player $B$ removes 3 sticks (5 sticks left).
|
||||
\item Player $A$ removes 1 stick (4 sticks left).
|
||||
\item Player $B$ removes 2 sticks (2 sticks left).
|
||||
\item Player $A$ removes 2 sticks and wins.
|
||||
\end{enumerate}
|
||||
\end{itemize}
|
||||
|
||||
This game consists of states $0,1,2,\ldots,n$,
|
||||
where the number of the state corresponds to
|
||||
|
@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ is a winning state for the opponent.
|
|||
More generally, if there is a move that leads
|
||||
from the current state to a losing state,
|
||||
the current state is a winning state,
|
||||
and otherwise it is a losing state.
|
||||
and otherwise the current state is a losing state.
|
||||
Using this observation, we can classify all states
|
||||
of a game starting with losing states where
|
||||
there are no possible moves.
|
||||
|
@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ can be classified as follows
|
|||
It is easy to analyze this game:
|
||||
a state $k$ is a losing state if $k$ is
|
||||
divisible by 4, and otherwise it
|
||||
is winning state.
|
||||
is a winning state.
|
||||
An optimal way to play the game is
|
||||
to always choose a move after which
|
||||
the number of sticks in the heap
|
||||
|
@ -247,7 +247,7 @@ and this is always the final state.
|
|||
|
||||
It turns out that we can easily classify
|
||||
any nim state by calculating
|
||||
the \key{nim sum} $x_1 \oplus x_2 \oplus \cdots \oplus x_n$,
|
||||
the \key{nim sum} $s = x_1 \oplus x_2 \oplus \cdots \oplus x_n$,
|
||||
where $\oplus$ is the xor operation\footnote{The optimal strategy
|
||||
for nim was published in 1901 by C. L. Bouton \cite{bou01}.}.
|
||||
The states whose nim sum is 0 are losing states,
|
||||
|
@ -312,11 +312,11 @@ one bit in the nim sum:
|
|||
|
||||
\begin{center}
|
||||
\begin{tabular}{r|r}
|
||||
10 & \texttt{10\textcircled{1}0} \\
|
||||
10 & \texttt{10\underline{1}0} \\
|
||||
12 & \texttt{1100} \\
|
||||
5 & \texttt{0101} \\
|
||||
\hline
|
||||
3 & \texttt{00\textcircled{1}1} \\
|
||||
3 & \texttt{00\underline{1}1} \\
|
||||
\end{tabular}
|
||||
\end{center}
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -340,7 +340,8 @@ which is a losing state:
|
|||
|
||||
\index{misère game}
|
||||
|
||||
In a \key{misère game}, the goal is opposite,
|
||||
In a \key{misère game}, the goal of the game
|
||||
is opposite,
|
||||
so the player who removes the last stick
|
||||
loses the game.
|
||||
It turns out that a misère nim game can be
|
||||
|
@ -368,8 +369,8 @@ so the nim sum is not 0.
|
|||
|
||||
\index{Sprague–Grundy theorem}
|
||||
|
||||
The \key{Sprague–Grundy theorem}\footnote{The theorem was discovered
|
||||
independently by R. Sprague \cite{spr35} and P. M. Grundy \cite{gru39}.} generalizes the
|
||||
The \key{Sprague–Grundy theorem}\footnote{The theorem was
|
||||
independently discovered by R. Sprague \cite{spr35} and P. M. Grundy \cite{gru39}.} generalizes the
|
||||
strategy used in nim to all games that fulfil
|
||||
the following requirements:
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -755,7 +756,7 @@ The Grundy numbers for the mazes are as follows:
|
|||
In the initial state, the nim sum of the Grundy numbers
|
||||
is $2 \oplus 3 \oplus 3 = 2$, so
|
||||
the first player can win the game.
|
||||
An optimal move is to move two steps up
|
||||
One optimal move is to move two steps up
|
||||
in the first maze, which produces the nim sum
|
||||
$0 \oplus 3 \oplus 3 = 0$.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue