Strategy-Stealing is Non-Constructive

11/15/2019
by   Greg Bodwin, et al.
0

In many combinatorial games, one can prove that the first player wins under best play using a simple but non-constructive argument called strategy-stealing. This work is about the complexity behind these proofs: how hard is it to actually find a winning move in a game, when you know by strategy-stealing that one exists? We prove that this problem is PSPACE-hard already for Minimum Poset Games and Symmetric Maker-Maker Games, which are simple classes of games that capture two of the main types of strategy-stealing arguments in the current literature.

READ FULL TEXT

page 1

page 2

page 3

page 4

research
02/07/2020

Refining Constructive Hybrid Games

We extend the constructive differential game logic (CdGL) of hybrid game...
research
03/09/2023

Infinitely many absolute universes

Absolute combinatorial game theory was recently developed as a unifying ...
research
07/23/2022

Constructive comparison in bidding combinatorial games

A class of discrete Bidding Combinatorial Games that generalize alternat...
research
02/06/2020

Constructive Hybrid Games

Hybrid games are models which combine discrete, continuous, and adversar...
research
10/07/2019

No-Signaling Proofs with O(√(log n)) Provers are in PSPACE

No-signaling proofs, motivated by quantum computation, have found applic...
research
08/09/2020

Synthesizing safe coalition strategies

Concurrent games with a fixed number of agents have been thoroughly stud...
research
02/26/2019

Weighted games of best choice

The game of best choice (also known as the secretary problem) is a model...

Please sign up or login with your details

Forgot password? Click here to reset