Author |
Topic: rock paper scissors (Read 3716 times) |
|
temporary
Full Member
Posts: 255
|
 |
rock paper scissors
« on: Mar 25th, 2008, 6:31pm » |
 Quote  Modify
|
Optimal strategy, anyone? Keep in mind that a human mind can never be truely random, but if it was, would that help or hurt.
|
|
 IP Logged |
My goal is to find what my goal is, once I find what my goal is, my goal will be complete.
|
|
|
Benny
Uberpuzzler
Gender: 
Posts: 1024
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #1 on: Mar 25th, 2008, 8:53pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Situation:
Suppose, for instance, that scissors scores 1 point against paper, paper scores 2 against rock, and rock scores 3 against scissors.
In this situation, would you automatically form a rock and hope to score 3, or would you expect your opponent to form a rock, which you could beat by forming paper?
|
|
IP Logged |
If we want to understand our world — or how to change it — we must first understand the rational choices that shape it.
|
|
|
temporary
Full Member
Posts: 255
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #2 on: Mar 26th, 2008, 12:22am » |
Quote Modify
|
If most people would then use rock or paper based on what you just said, paper would become picked up by professionals. I would take advantage of that and use scissors. Or possibly paper on the ameteurs who would probably use rock. Is it best 2/3 or just 1?
|
|
IP Logged |
My goal is to find what my goal is, once I find what my goal is, my goal will be complete.
|
|
|
Benny
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 1024
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #3 on: Mar 27th, 2008, 11:07pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Actually, making the same choice every time doesn't work. What seems to make sense, again, is to mix the three choices randomly, forming each of scissors, paper, and rock with a certain probability. The scoring system determines what these probabilities ought to be to achieve an optimal result. In the example given, you can calculate that the probability should be 1/3 for scissors, 1/2 for paper, and 1/6 for rock. Other scoring schemes give different probabilities.
Any deviation from a random mixing strategy gives your opponent an opportunity to profit from your actions. At the same time, by sticking strictly to these probabilities, you forgo any chance of taking advantage of bad play on the part of your opponent. When both players adopt exactly the same strategy, no one wins -- or loses -- in the long run.
|
|
IP Logged |
If we want to understand our world — or how to change it — we must first understand the rational choices that shape it.
|
|
|
temporary
Full Member
Posts: 255
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #4 on: Mar 28th, 2008, 9:58am » |
Quote Modify
|
Except that a human mind cannot be random, nor can it pick something with a probability, it decides whether or not to pick it. However, there might be a way...
|
|
IP Logged |
My goal is to find what my goal is, once I find what my goal is, my goal will be complete.
|
|
|
Benny
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 1024
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #5 on: Mar 28th, 2008, 10:23am » |
Quote Modify
|
How? I'm curious to hear your perspective.
I see it as a game theory problem where you would have 2 or more rational people.
|
|
IP Logged |
If we want to understand our world — or how to change it — we must first understand the rational choices that shape it.
|
|
|
Grimbal
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 7527
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #6 on: Mar 30th, 2008, 12:22pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Unfortunately, game theory won't tell you how to win, it only tells you how not to loose. What they call an "optimal strategy" is actually only a "balanced strategy". Playing that strategy zeroes the expected winning for both players. So it is a protection against any strategy, however devilish your opponent is, but at the same time prevents any possibility of winning, however stupid your opponent's strategy is.
To actually win against a stupid opponent, you have to depart from the "optimal strategy". If he always plays rock, you can always play paper. But you risk to be outsmarted. He might play 3 times rock to show a trend and then switch to scissor. Hehe...
But I have heard of a program that is successful at it. It starts with a balanced strategy for some time and record what the player does. It will assume that the player will react in the same way after winning or loosing in some way. It will record for each sequence of 3 games or so, what was his next move. When the same situation arrives, it will play in a way to beat what the player did previously.
The problem is to find how fast to do the transition.
It should be gradual, departing from neutral play only in situations where a trend is quite visible (statistically significant) and return to neutral play whenever the trend proves wrong. Or it could just adjust the probabilities of what it plays more or less depending on how significant the trend is.
Of course, there will always be a way to outsmart the program. Just look at the source, write a program that does the same evaluations, see what the program would play and play that which beats it.
|
| « Last Edit: Mar 30th, 2008, 12:24pm by Grimbal » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
temporary
Full Member
Posts: 255
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #7 on: Mar 30th, 2008, 11:43pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Although mind tricks can also work on non-computer opponents. Like, "I think I should choose paper since you always choose that lame old rock. How predictable." Then expect scissors and play rock. The closest thing to being random a human can do is base decisions on randomness like, "I will flip 2 coins. If 0 are heads, rock, if 1 is heads, paper, if all are heads, scissors, which is 1/4 rock, 1/2 paper, and 1/4 scissors, decided randomly, but you wouldn't do that on every rock paper scissors game. Too inconvenient.
|
| « Last Edit: Mar 30th, 2008, 11:47pm by temporary » |
IP Logged |
My goal is to find what my goal is, once I find what my goal is, my goal will be complete.
|
|
|
Benny
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 1024
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #8 on: Mar 31st, 2008, 8:58am » |
Quote Modify
|
Nash showed that in any competitive situation—war, chess, even picking up a date at a bar—if the participants are rational, and they know that their
opponents are rational, there can be only one optimal strategy.
However, people aren't rational. And rational people can be predictably irrational.
Nash's theorem says that it is always possible for a player to choose a strategy that is best for him or her when all the other players are also following their best strategies. In this "equilibrium", no player can improve his or her prospects by choosing an alternative strategy.
Couldn't we apply this theorem in this rock paper scissors problem?
|
|
IP Logged |
If we want to understand our world — or how to change it — we must first understand the rational choices that shape it.
|
|
|
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
Some people are average, some are just mean.
Gender:
Posts: 13730
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #9 on: Mar 31st, 2008, 9:52am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Mar 31st, 2008, 8:58am, BenVitale wrote:| Nash showed that in any competitive situation—war, chess, even picking up a date at a bar—if the participants are rational, and they know that their opponents are rational, there can be only one optimal strategy. |
|
That doesn't sound right; surely there are plenty of games where there are multiple equivalent strategies, all equally optimal.
Quote:| Nash's theorem says that it is always possible for a player to choose a strategy that is best for him or her when all the other players are also following their best strategies. In this "equilibrium", no player can improve his or her prospects by choosing an alternative strategy. |
|
Not all games have a Nash equilibrium. There is no equilibrium for rock-paper-scissors, for example. Because each strategy (picking either rock, paper or scissors) is beaten by the next.
|
|
IP Logged |
Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
|
|
|
pex
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 880
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #10 on: Mar 31st, 2008, 10:52am » |
Quote Modify
|
What Nash proved is that any game with finitely many pure strategies, there exists at least one equilibrium - but possibly in "mixed" strategies, that is, randomizing over pure strategies.
In rock-paper-scissors, the equilibrium would have both players choosing any of the three pure strategies, each with probability 1/3.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Benny
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 1024
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #11 on: Mar 31st, 2008, 1:11pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Generally speaking,
What if it looks like you just can't win, what's the most rational thing to do? What if neither you nor your opponent can improve your score by unilaterally changing your mind?
You can either decline playing the game or adopt a non-rational strategy. Wouldn't a rational strategy be to be completely irrational?
The thing is Classic game theory supposes, of course, that everyone is acting rationally. But what if they are not? I heard that a small group of mathematicians think they have found a way to boost the power of game theory. They have included the irrational" influences of emotion, they call it drama theory.
|
|
IP Logged |
If we want to understand our world — or how to change it — we must first understand the rational choices that shape it.
|
|
|
pex
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 880
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #12 on: Mar 31st, 2008, 2:02pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Well, either way, rock-paper-scissors is a zero-sum game (one wins, the other loses). Thus, in the long run, nothing (rational or irrational) will work as a winning strategy, unless the other player is too stupid to imitate you...
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Benny
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 1024
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #13 on: Mar 31st, 2008, 4:00pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I've just come across an article on the web that says:
Scientists believe they have worked out the secret to winning at paper, scissors, stone.While most people are aware that stone blunts scissors, scissors cut paper and paper covers stone, there is a psychological element to the game which many players may have missed.
NewScientist http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/mg19626352.700-how-to-wi n-at-rock-paper-or-scissors.html
I don't have access to read the complete article.
According to New Scientist magazine, the way to win is to start with scissors.
Research shows that stone, also called rock, is the most popular of the three possible moves in the game.
That means that your opponent is likely to choose paper, because they will expect to you to start the game with stone.
By going with scissors, you achieve an early victory.The scissors strategy has proven very successful in the past
|
|
IP Logged |
If we want to understand our world — or how to change it — we must first understand the rational choices that shape it.
|
|
|
JiNbOtAk
Uberpuzzler
Hana Hana No Mi
Gender:
Posts: 1187
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #14 on: Mar 31st, 2008, 7:54pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Mar 31st, 2008, 4:00pm, BenVitale wrote:| By going with scissors, you achieve an early victory.The scissors strategy has proven very successful in the past |
|
Which, most people would do once they read this article. But if you know your opponent had read this, and is probably going to use scissors, are you going to choose scissors as well ? Or choose rock ?
|
|
IP Logged |
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
|
|
|
temporary
Full Member
Posts: 255
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #15 on: Apr 1st, 2008, 4:38pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Not only is there optimal strategy on what people usually start with and what you should start with to beat that, but also how to be unpredictable or predict your opponent. For example, choosing the same thing twice is supposedly unexpected, but the third time is it obvious, or unexpected for that reason?
|
|
IP Logged |
My goal is to find what my goal is, once I find what my goal is, my goal will be complete.
|
|
|
Benny
Uberpuzzler
Gender:
Posts: 1024
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #16 on: Apr 1st, 2008, 10:59pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Have you tried to play this game with friends?
Well, I have tried with a match of 50 rounds. I've found out that the number of wins is equal to the number of losses and more than the number of ties.
I find that there are two contributing factors in predicting your opponent's moves: Past Performance (Pattern) and Human Psychology (Mental).
|
|
IP Logged |
If we want to understand our world — or how to change it — we must first understand the rational choices that shape it.
|
|
|
temporary
Full Member
Posts: 255
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #17 on: Apr 5th, 2008, 7:38pm » |
Quote Modify
|
But there is some overlapping between the two. For example, you choose scissors twice in best 3 of 5 and your opponent chooses paper twice. Say"You know what's coming next" and choose paper. Also, since you people mentioned nash equilibrium, I thought I should mention e-card. emperor>citizen>slave>emperor. The emperor side(4 citizens and an emperor) plays their card (face down) first. Then the slave side(4 citizens and a slave) plays their card and they both reveal them. In the second round(assuming it is not already over), the slave side plays their card first then the emperor side plays theirs, etc until someone wins. And you cannot choose randomly. Discuss that nash equilibrium.
|
| « Last Edit: Apr 22nd, 2008, 5:38pm by temporary » |
IP Logged |
My goal is to find what my goal is, once I find what my goal is, my goal will be complete.
|
|
|
ChrisPBacon
Newbie
Roflcopters and lawlerskaters!
Gender:
Posts: 35
|
|
Re: rock paper scissors
« Reply #18 on: Jun 20th, 2008, 12:19pm » |
Quote Modify
|
PAPER!!  lol
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
RIDDLES SITE
WRITE MATH!
Home 
Help 
Search 
Members 
Login 
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print