Hi marksmeets302
There is a slight mistake in your sequences containing HTH
You have included THTT which, of course, doesn't contain HTH
So your example comes up with the same answer for both
Which is more likely
Hi again gazuty
Interesting thread and I actually agree with you but am wondering if the original wording sounds too much like the following scenario...
Toss a coin and write down the resulting sequence and then circle every occurrence of HTT and HTH.
If you did that, I say you would find the same number of occurrences.
However, if you didn't have a whole sequence to examine after it occurred but, instead, you had one person counting the HTT's as they happened and another counting the HTH's as they happened there would be fewer HTH's.
I still think even with that description there is room for ambiguity but I am trying not to give too much of the game away myself.
Interesting thread and I actually agree with you but am wondering if the original wording sounds too much like the following scenario...
Toss a coin and write down the resulting sequence and then circle every occurrence of HTT and HTH.
If you did that, I say you would find the same number of occurrences.
However, if you didn't have a whole sequence to examine after it occurred but, instead, you had one person counting the HTT's as they happened and another counting the HTH's as they happened there would be fewer HTH's.
I still think even with that description there is room for ambiguity but I am trying not to give too much of the game away myself.
I was originally thinking along these lines too. But in the first case, you are BOTH only 2 flips away from victory. And in the second case, you are BOTH still 3 flips away from victory.gazuty wrote:If Gazuty loses (because Kate flipped a H), Gazuty is a minimum 2 flips away from a victory. When he loses Gazuty has the starting H of the next possible winning sequence.
If Markmeets loses (because Kate flipped a T), Markmeets is a minimum 3 flips away from victory.
I don't see how that makes either one more likely, unless I've missed something?
I was kinda curious so I ran a quick monte carlo simulation in Excel:
1. Generate a column of 1 / 0 using RAND()
2. Next column checks for last three being 101
3. Next column checks for last three being 100
4. Filled down 30,000 rows (as that's all I could be bothered to do!)
5. Refreshed sheet about 30 times to generate a total of around 1,000,000 flips.
Totals:
101 - 127760
100 - 127267
A discrepancy of around 0.3%.
What was the TED talk that you mentioned earlier? Perhaps either we've misunderstood it, or we're misinterpreting the point.
1. Generate a column of 1 / 0 using RAND()
2. Next column checks for last three being 101
3. Next column checks for last three being 100
4. Filled down 30,000 rows (as that's all I could be bothered to do!)
5. Refreshed sheet about 30 times to generate a total of around 1,000,000 flips.
Totals:
101 - 127760
100 - 127267
A discrepancy of around 0.3%.
What was the TED talk that you mentioned earlier? Perhaps either we've misunderstood it, or we're misinterpreting the point.
- marksmeets302
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 4:37 pm
Thanks tanden, I saw my mistake after a double espresso.
I like the solution, but there's something nagging... I just wrote a program that generates a million sequences of length 1000, and checks how many times I win, and how many times Gazuty wins. This is the result:
hthwin: 485016
httwin: 489799
(the rest are ties)
Gazuty wins! His edge is small though and I wonder if statistics would say it is significant. I'm still a bit confused.
That said, since Kate Upton is involved I'd say we're both winners. Keep these puzzles coming, I love them!
I like the solution, but there's something nagging... I just wrote a program that generates a million sequences of length 1000, and checks how many times I win, and how many times Gazuty wins. This is the result:
hthwin: 485016
httwin: 489799
(the rest are ties)
Gazuty wins! His edge is small though and I wonder if statistics would say it is significant. I'm still a bit confused.
That said, since Kate Upton is involved I'd say we're both winners. Keep these puzzles coming, I love them!
Last edited by marksmeets302 on Fri Apr 01, 2016 2:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hi xitian
I don't want to step all over gazuty's thread but as he was going to sleep I'll see if I can explain.
He can tell me where I go wrong later!
In the imaginary game the rules would say that each player can only use each letter once but if player1 uses a letter that doesn't prevent player2 from also using it.
So as soon as there is an HTH that's a win for Marksmeets but he is not allowed to reuse the H at the end of that sequence because he has already used it.
However, Gazuty hasn't yet used that H so is already one step closer to getting HTT.
When there is an HTT that's a win for Gazuty but the last T is of no use to Marksmeets and so overall Gazuty has a slight advantage.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To me, that makes the game seem biased but another way of looking at it is...
Scenario 1...
Write out 2 identical copies of a sequence of coin tosses
Give one copy to Gazuty and one to Marksmeets
Ask each player to circle every occurrence of their pattern
I say each player will find the same number of occurrences
(This is what the guy's who have written simulations have found)
Scenario 2...
Write out 2 identical copies of a sequence of coin tosses
Give one copy to Gazuty and one to Marksmeets
Ask each player to physically cut out each occurrence of their pattern
This time, Gazuty (HTT) will find the same number of occurrences as in Scenario 1
However, Marksmeets (HTH) will find fewer occurrences
The reason is that sometimes there will be a sequence like HTHTH
If you circle the HTH's you can circle 2 occurrences although they overlap (positions 123 and 345)
But when you have to cut out the occurrences you can only get one of them
The HTT's can never overlap each other and so you always find all occurrences
If you want to confirm this in a simulation then you will have to add a column that disallows any coin tosses that have already been used.
So if column X tests for the required pattern then cell X4 might say something like...
=if(or(X2=1,X3=1),0,{test for pattern})
I don't want to step all over gazuty's thread but as he was going to sleep I'll see if I can explain.
He can tell me where I go wrong later!
In the imaginary game the rules would say that each player can only use each letter once but if player1 uses a letter that doesn't prevent player2 from also using it.
So as soon as there is an HTH that's a win for Marksmeets but he is not allowed to reuse the H at the end of that sequence because he has already used it.
However, Gazuty hasn't yet used that H so is already one step closer to getting HTT.
When there is an HTT that's a win for Gazuty but the last T is of no use to Marksmeets and so overall Gazuty has a slight advantage.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To me, that makes the game seem biased but another way of looking at it is...
Scenario 1...
Write out 2 identical copies of a sequence of coin tosses
Give one copy to Gazuty and one to Marksmeets
Ask each player to circle every occurrence of their pattern
I say each player will find the same number of occurrences
(This is what the guy's who have written simulations have found)
Scenario 2...
Write out 2 identical copies of a sequence of coin tosses
Give one copy to Gazuty and one to Marksmeets
Ask each player to physically cut out each occurrence of their pattern
This time, Gazuty (HTT) will find the same number of occurrences as in Scenario 1
However, Marksmeets (HTH) will find fewer occurrences
The reason is that sometimes there will be a sequence like HTHTH
If you circle the HTH's you can circle 2 occurrences although they overlap (positions 123 and 345)
But when you have to cut out the occurrences you can only get one of them
The HTT's can never overlap each other and so you always find all occurrences
If you want to confirm this in a simulation then you will have to add a column that disallows any coin tosses that have already been used.
So if column X tests for the required pattern then cell X4 might say something like...
=if(or(X2=1,X3=1),0,{test for pattern})
-
- Posts: 108
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 1:10 pm
Hi Tanden,
Good points there. I agree it's totally about what the rules are. In the second case I also think that the rules are simply biased! Subtle difference though, and makes you realise how a small modification to something can have a big impact. That's definitely something I've learnt over the years and very applicable to trading and systems.
Good points there. I agree it's totally about what the rules are. In the second case I also think that the rules are simply biased! Subtle difference though, and makes you realise how a small modification to something can have a big impact. That's definitely something I've learnt over the years and very applicable to trading and systems.
This is one of a few things I pull out as party pieces.
There are several clever things you can do to lead people to jump on what is surely a random event, but when their money is gone they can't prove in any way that it wasn't random.
I won't spoil it.
There are some really clever bits of maths and psychology you can use in random events to give yourself a better chance. I attended a charity ball recently and won a stack of prizes and then gave them back to the charity to raffle, after a half drunk speech on how life isn't as random as people often think it is and to be aware of that.
It was a slight swipe at people who invited me with some angst after learning of the nature of my business. My wife was suitably embarrassed and was pretty chuffed at myself.
There are several clever things you can do to lead people to jump on what is surely a random event, but when their money is gone they can't prove in any way that it wasn't random.
I won't spoil it.
There are some really clever bits of maths and psychology you can use in random events to give yourself a better chance. I attended a charity ball recently and won a stack of prizes and then gave them back to the charity to raffle, after a half drunk speech on how life isn't as random as people often think it is and to be aware of that.
It was a slight swipe at people who invited me with some angst after learning of the nature of my business. My wife was suitably embarrassed and was pretty chuffed at myself.
-
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 2:44 pm
At the end of Deal Or No Deal (or any gameshow) the question of should you switch boxes being my favourite example of this.There are some really clever bits of maths and psychology you can use in random events to give yourself a better chance
Its a 50/50 chance.... isn't it.....
-
- Posts: 3140
- Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:06 pm
Deal or No deal isn't an example of the Monty Hall problem, Noel doesn't open a box at the end to increase your odds. Only advantage in opening the other box is the crap odds the banker offers.Lost The Rider wrote:At the end of Deal Or No Deal (or any gameshow) the question of should you switch boxes being my favourite example of this.There are some really clever bits of maths and psychology you can use in random events to give yourself a better chance
Its a 50/50 chance.... isn't it.....
I'l take a shot at the raffle, if everyone had bought one ticket each they would have an equal chance of winning.Euler wrote:This is one of a few things I pull out as party pieces.
There are several clever things you can do to lead people to jump on what is surely a random event, but when their money is gone they can't prove in any way that it wasn't random.
I won't spoil it.
There are some really clever bits of maths and psychology you can use in random events to give yourself a better chance. I attended a charity ball recently and won a stack of prizes and then gave them back to the charity to raffle, after a half drunk speech on how life isn't as random as people often think it is and to be aware of that.
It was a slight swipe at people who invited me with some angst after learning of the nature of my business. My wife was suitably embarrassed and was pretty chuffed at myself.
I think you bought an amount of tickets that cost less than half the value of the items won and you worked out how many tickets to buy to win more than 50% of the time?
-
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 2:44 pm
This was a trick question posed by my old stats lecturer when we were covering Monty Hall. You are correct it isn't a Monty Hall scenario despite portraying similar characteristics.Deal or No deal isn't an example of the Monty Hall problem, Noel doesn't open a box at the end to increase your odds. Only advantage in opening the other box is the crap odds the banker offers.
It makes no difference. In Deal Or No Deal when left with two boxes at the end there is a 50/50 chance of any of the two remaining values being in each of the boxes. The show is essentially a convoluted way of randomly picking 2 boxes from 22.