Knowledge

Solved game

Source 📝

179:, one can recursively evaluate a non-final position as identical to the position that is one move away and best valued for the player whose move it is. Thus a transition between positions can never result in a better evaluation for the moving player, and a perfect move in a position would be a transition between positions that are equally evaluated. As an example, a perfect player in a drawn position would always get a draw or win, never a loss. If there are multiple options with the same outcome, perfect play is sometimes considered the fastest method leading to a good result, or the slowest method leading to a bad result. 263: 641:) shows that all square board sizes cannot be lost by the first player. Combined with a proof of the impossibility of a draw, this shows that the game is a first player win (so it is ultra-weak solved). On particular board sizes, more is known: it is strongly solved by several computers for board sizes up to 6×6. Weak solutions are known for board sizes 7×7 (using a 127:. However, since for many non-trivial games such an algorithm would require an infeasible amount of time to generate a move in a given position, a game is not considered to be solved weakly or strongly unless the algorithm can be run by existing hardware in a reasonable time. Many algorithms rely on a huge pre-generated database and are effectively nothing more. 1519:(which says the 7x7 solution is only weakly solved and it's still under research, 1. the correct komi is 9 (4.5 stone); 2. there are multiple optimal trees - the first 3 moves are unique - but within the first 7 moves there are 5 optimal trees; 3. There are many ways to play that don't affect the result) 115:
By contrast, "strong" proofs often proceed by brute force—using a computer to exhaustively search a game tree to figure out what would happen if perfect play were realized. The resulting proof gives an optimal strategy for every possible position on the board. However, these proofs are not as helpful
174:
is the behavior or strategy of a player that leads to the best possible outcome for that player regardless of the response by the opponent. Perfect play for a game is known when the game is solved. Based on the rules of a game, every possible final position can be evaluated (as a win, loss or draw).
145:
Whether a game is solved is not necessarily the same as whether it remains interesting for humans to play. Even a strongly solved game can still be interesting if its solution is too complex to be memorized; conversely, a weakly solved game may lose its attraction if the winning strategy is simple
675:
All endgame positions with two through seven pieces were solved, as well as positions with 4×4 and 5×3 pieces where each side had one king or fewer, positions with five men versus four men, positions with five men versus three men and one king, and positions with four men and one king versus four
194:
would be to randomly choose each of the options with equal (1/3) probability. The disadvantage in this example is that this strategy will never exploit non-optimal strategies of the opponent, so the expected outcome of this strategy versus any strategy will always be equal to the minimal expected
111:
Despite their name, many game theorists believe that "ultra-weak" proofs are the deepest, most interesting and valuable. "Ultra-weak" proofs require a scholar to reason about the abstract properties of the game, and show how these properties lead to certain outcomes if perfect play is realized.
273:
on October 16, 1988. The first player can force a win. Strongly solved by John Tromp's 8-ply database (Feb 4, 1995). Weakly solved for all boardsizes where width+height is at most 15 (as well as 8×8 in late 2015) (Feb 18, 2006). Solved for all boardsizes where width+height equals 16 on May 22,
476:. From the standard starting position, both players can guarantee a draw with perfect play. Checkers has a search space of 5×10 possible game positions. The number of calculations involved was 10, which were done over a period of 18 years. The process involved from 200 1189: 374:
Strongly solved by Jason Doucette (2001). The game is a draw. There are only two unique first moves if you discard mirrored positions. One forces the draw, and the other gives the opponent a forced win in 15
317:
Most variants solved by Geoffrey Irving, Jeroen Donkers and Jos Uiterwijk (2000) except Kalah (6/6). The (6/6) variant was solved by Anders Carstensen (2011). Strong first-player advantage was proven in most
515:. From the standard starting position on an 8×8 board, a perfect play by both players will result in a draw. Othello is the largest game solved to date, with a search space of 10 possible game positions. 676:
men. The endgame positions were solved in 2007 by Ed Gilbert of the United States. Computer analysis showed that it was highly likely to end in a draw if both players played perfectly.
621:
The 5×5 board was weakly solved for all opening moves in 2002. The 7×7 board was weakly solved in 2015. Humans usually play on a 19×19 board, which is over 145
432:
Strongly solved by Johannes Laire in 2009, and weakly solved by Ali Elabridi in 2017. It is a win for the blue pieces (Cardinal Richelieu's men, or, the enemy).
665:+ 1) board then the player who has the shorter distance to connect can always win by a simple pairing strategy, even with the disadvantage of playing second. 799: 93:
Provide an algorithm that secures a win for one player, or a draw for either, against any possible play by the opponent, from the beginning of the game.
440:
Trivially strongly solvable because of the small game tree. The game is a draw if no mistakes are made, with no mistake possible on the opening move.
366:
Weakly solved by humans, but proven by computers. (Dakon is, however, not identical to Ohvalhu, the game which actually had been observed by de Voogt)
198:
Although the optimal strategy of a game may not (yet) be known, a game-playing computer might still benefit from solutions of the game from certain
1107: 1137: 116:
in understanding deeper reasons why some games are solvable as a draw, and other, seemingly very similar games are solvable as a win.
586:
Fully solving chess remains elusive, and it is speculated that the complexity of the game may preclude it ever being solved. Through
984: 1477: 1364: 1334: 42:) can be correctly predicted from any position, assuming that both players play perfectly. This concept is usually applied to 1619: 1356: 2518: 297: 1531: 2691: 2335: 1870: 1668: 746: 17: 2154: 1973: 1162: 997: 2686: 1775: 1485: 779: 2244: 2114: 1785: 119:
Given the rules of any two-person game with a finite number of positions, one can always trivially construct a
1953: 645:), 8×8, and 9×9; in the 8×8 case, a weak solution is known for all opening moves. Strongly solving Hex on an 2295: 1713: 1688: 134:
is easily solvable as a draw for both players with perfect play (a result manually determinable). Games like
2645: 2071: 1825: 1815: 1750: 1234: 2681: 1865: 1845: 2579: 2330: 2300: 1958: 1800: 1795: 696: 634: 80: 46:, and especially to games with full information and no element of chance; solving such a game may use 2615: 2538: 2274: 1830: 1755: 1612: 609:
have been solved. Some other popular variants have also been solved; for example, a weak solution to
139: 107:
for both players from any position, even if imperfect play has already occurred on one or both sides.
47: 1406: 2630: 2363: 2249: 2046: 1840: 1658: 915: 610: 329: 147: 2433: 1111: 2635: 2234: 2204: 1860: 1648: 1547:
P. Henderson, B. Arneson, and R. Hayward, , Proc. IJCAI-09 505-510 (2009) Retrieved 29 June 2010.
530: 427: 1461: 2660: 2640: 2620: 2569: 2239: 2144: 2003: 1948: 1880: 1850: 1770: 1698: 1354: 1230: 670: 449: 248: 43: 1456: 1355:
M.P.D. Schadd; M.H.M. Winands; J.W.H.M. Uiterwijk; H.J. van den Herik; M.H.J. Bergsma (2008).
2696: 2119: 2104: 1678: 1039: 949: 794: 638: 419: 2453: 2438: 2325: 2320: 2224: 2209: 2174: 2139: 1738: 1683: 1605: 1269: 1126: 345: 875: 8: 2610: 2229: 2179: 2016: 1943: 1923: 1780: 1663: 587: 390: 191: 183: 2269: 1273: 1190:"Weakly Solving the Three Musketeers Game Using Artificial Intelligence and Game Theory" 1003: 2589: 2448: 2279: 2259: 2109: 1988: 1893: 1820: 1765: 1510: 1431: 1295: 966: 898: 741: 622: 512: 473: 413: 238: 76: 71:
Prove whether the first player will win, lose or draw from the initial position, given
1474: 613:
is an easily memorable series of moves that guarantees victory to the "sepoys" player.
253:
Strongly solved. If two players both play perfectly, the game will go on indefinitely.
2574: 2543: 2498: 2393: 2264: 2219: 2194: 2124: 1998: 1928: 1918: 1810: 1760: 1708: 1497: 1287: 1156: 993: 940: 775: 591: 548: 443: 203: 176: 1299: 838: 190:
regardless of the strategy of the opponent. As an example, the perfect strategy for
2655: 2650: 2584: 2548: 2528: 2488: 2458: 2413: 2368: 2353: 2310: 2164: 1805: 1742: 1728: 1693: 1373: 1277: 1026: 958: 731: 628: 558: 477: 462: 155: 369: 2553: 2513: 2468: 2383: 2378: 2099: 2051: 1938: 1703: 1673: 1643: 1585: 1535: 1481: 1381: 983:
Gasser, Ralph (1996). "Solving Nine Men's Morris". In Nowakowski, Richard (ed.).
736: 654: 404:
Claimed to be solved by János Wagner and István Virág (2001). A first-player win.
353: 309:
3×3 variant solved as a win for black, several other larger variants also solved.
59: 2418: 2493: 2483: 2473: 2408: 2398: 2388: 2373: 2169: 2149: 2134: 2129: 2089: 2056: 2041: 2036: 2026: 1835: 1528: 1205: 721: 536: 207: 187: 1377: 1313: 1093: 1052: 2675: 2533: 2523: 2478: 2463: 2443: 2214: 2189: 2061: 2031: 2021: 2008: 1913: 1855: 1790: 1723: 1556: 1065: 856: 595: 580: 199: 1282: 1257: 350:
Solved by Ralph Gasser (1993). Either player can force the game into a draw.
2508: 2503: 2358: 1933: 1291: 599: 540: 495: 290: 284: 270: 256: 1573:
Beating the World Champion? The state-of-the-art in computer game playing.
1175: 2625: 2428: 2423: 2403: 2199: 2184: 1993: 1963: 1898: 1888: 1653: 1629: 992:. Vol. 29. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 101–113. 726: 435: 167: 131: 1597: 334:
This asymmetrical game is a win for the sepoys player with correct play.
269:
Solved first by James D. Allen on October 1, 1988, and independently by
2254: 1908: 970: 679: 206:), which will allow it to play perfectly after some point in the game. 39: 395:
Solved by Luc Goossens (1998). Two perfect players will always draw.
158:
on a sufficiently large board) generally does not affect playability.
2159: 2079: 1903: 1591: 820: 616: 606: 520: 416:(1998). Depending on the variant either a first-player win or a draw. 242: 234: 124: 1460:, MSRI Publications – Volume 29, 1996, pages 339-344. Online: 962: 2594: 2094: 1436: 642: 607:
variants of chess on a smaller board with reduced numbers of pieces
500:
Weakly solved in 2016 as a win for White beginning with 1. e3.
485: 469: 304: 245:, Netherlands (2002). Either player can force the game into a draw. 83:) that need not actually determine any details of the perfect play. 383:
Strongly solved by Geoffrey Irving with use of a supercomputer at
2315: 2305: 1983: 594:(strong solutions) have been found for all three- to seven-piece 505: 424:
Trivially solvable. Either player can force the game into a draw.
378: 361: 223: 120: 695:
It is trivial to show that the second player can never win; see
186:
games, as the strategy that would guarantee the highest minimal
1594:
solving two-person games with perfect information and no chance
525:
Weakly solved by H. K. Orman. It is a win for the first player.
321: 287:(1993). The first player can force a win without opening rules. 278: 262: 326:
Easily solvable. Either player can force the game into a draw.
2084: 573: 407: 398: 384: 312: 230: 219: 151: 772:
Searching for Solutions in Games and Artificial Intelligence
35: 511:
Weakly solved in 2023 by Hiroki Takizawa, a researcher at
233:
allowing game ending "grand slams" was strongly solved by
1314:"Project - Chinook - World Man-Machine Checkers Champion" 927: 337: 135: 1217: 563:
Weakly solved by Yew Jin Lim (2007). The game is a draw.
653:
board is unlikely as the problem has been shown to be
130:
As a simple example of a strong solution, the game of
918:
by Geoffrey Irving, Jeroen Donkers and Jos Uiterwijk.
839:"UCI Machine Learning Repository: Connect-4 Data Set" 774:(PhD thesis). Maastricht: Rijksuniversiteit Limburg. 1430:
Takizawa, Hiroki (2023-10-30). "Othello is Solved".
490:
Weakly solved by Maarten Schadd. The game is a draw.
472:
was weakly solved on April 29, 2007, by the team of
1335:"Checkers 'solved' after years of number crunching" 2673: 1125:Wágner, János & Virág, István (March 2001). 815: 813: 699:. Almost all cases have been solved weakly for 123:algorithm that would exhaustively traverse the 1613: 1586:Computational Complexity of Games and Puzzles 810: 27:Game whose outcome can be correctly predicted 797:, Jos W.H.M. Uiterwijk, Jack van Rijswijck, 1538:, Tromp and Farnebäck, accessed 2007-08-24. 1398: 1124: 939: 1620: 1606: 1575:in New Approaches to Board Games Research. 1348: 945:a game with a complete mathematical theory 1627: 1435: 1281: 1255: 567: 553:Weakly solved: win for the second player. 401:-like game without opening rules involved 1557:Some of the nine-piece endgame tablebase 1511:"首期喆理围棋沙龙举行 李喆7路盘最优解具有里程碑意义_下棋想赢怕输_新浪博客" 1429: 266:The game of Connect Four has been solved 261: 210:programs are well known for doing this. 1365:New Mathematics and Natural Computation 1332: 1229: 765: 763: 761: 182:Perfect play can be generalized to non- 14: 2674: 1475:On Forward Pruning in Game-Tree Search 1134:Széchenyi Egyetem - University of Győr 1040:"solved: Order wins - Order and Chaos" 982: 103:Provide an algorithm that can produce 65: 1601: 1357:"Best Play in Fanorona leads to Draw" 873: 769: 138:also admit a rigorous analysis using 1407:"Losing Chess: 1. e3 wins for White" 1187: 1094:"414298141056 Quarto Draws Suffice!" 758: 298:Official Scrabble Players Dictionary 1404: 1235:"A modification of the game of nim" 1053:Pangki is strongly solved as a draw 800:Games solved: Now and in the future 24: 1669:First-player and second-player win 1565: 1522: 1503: 1491: 1467: 1444: 1256:Schaeffer, Jonathan (2007-07-19). 1143:from the original on 24 April 2024 770:Allis, Louis Victor (1994-09-23). 97: 25: 2708: 1579: 896: 150:). An ultra-weak solution (e.g., 104: 72: 62:can be solved on several levels: 1776:Coalition-proof Nash equilibrium 1486:National University of Singapore 821:"John's Connect Four Playground" 703:≤ 4. Some results are known for 87: 1550: 1541: 1452:Pentominoes: A First Player Win 1423: 1337:. NewScientist.com news service 1326: 1306: 1249: 1223: 1211: 1199: 1181: 1169: 1118: 1100: 1086: 1058: 1046: 1032: 1020: 976: 933: 747:Zermelo's theorem (game theory) 295:Solved by Alan Frank using the 213: 161: 1786:Evolutionarily stable strategy 1529:Counting legal positions in Go 1333:Mullins, Justin (2007-07-19). 921: 909: 890: 867: 849: 831: 788: 480:at its peak down to around 50. 456: 13: 1: 1714:Simultaneous action selection 1161:: CS1 maint: date and year ( 752: 707:= 5. The games are drawn for 75:on both sides. This can be a 2646:List of games in game theory 1826:Quantal response equilibrium 1816:Perfect Bayesian equilibrium 1751:Bayes correlated equilibrium 588:retrograde computer analysis 79:proof (possibly involving a 50:and/or computer assistance. 38:whose outcome (win, lose or 7: 2115:Optional prisoner's dilemma 1846:Self-confirming equilibrium 1239:Nieuw Archief voor Wiskunde 1027:Nine Men's Morris is a Draw 715: 53: 10: 2713: 2580:Principal variation search 2296:Aumann's agreement theorem 1959:Strategy-stealing argument 1871:Trembling hand equilibrium 1801:Markov perfect equilibrium 1796:Mertens-stable equilibrium 874:Frank, Alan (1987-08-01). 697:strategy-stealing argument 635:strategy-stealing argument 578: 358:Order (First player) wins. 202:positions (in the form of 146:enough to remember (e.g., 81:strategy-stealing argument 2692:Combinatorial game theory 2616:Combinatorial game theory 2603: 2562: 2344: 2288: 2275:Princess and monster game 2070: 1972: 1879: 1831:Quasi-perfect equilibrium 1756:Bayesian Nash equilibrium 1737: 1636: 1378:10.1142/S1793005708001124 857:"ChristopheSteininger/c4" 657:. If Hex is played on an 140:combinatorial game theory 48:combinatorial game theory 2631:Evolutionary game theory 2364:Antoine Augustin Cournot 2250:Guess 2/3 of the average 2047:Strictly determined game 1841:Satisfaction equilibrium 1659:Escalation of commitment 611:Maharajah and the Sepoys 543:. The first player wins. 387:. The first player wins. 330:Maharajah and the Sepoys 148:Maharajah and the Sepoys 2687:Abstract strategy games 2636:Glossary of game theory 2235:Stackelberg competition 1861:Strong Nash equilibrium 1283:10.1126/science.1144079 805:Artificial Intelligence 237:and John Romein at the 44:abstract strategy games 2661:Tragedy of the commons 2641:List of game theorists 2621:Confrontation analysis 2331:Sprague–Grundy theorem 1851:Sequential equilibrium 1771:Correlated equilibrium 671:International draughts 625:more complex than 7×7. 568:Partially solved games 267: 2434:Jean-François Mertens 950:Annals of Mathematics 930:by Anders Carstensen. 903:www.chessvariants.com 795:H. Jaap van den Herik 265: 2563:Search optimizations 2439:Jennifer Tour Chayes 2326:Revelation principle 2321:Purification theorem 2260:Nash bargaining game 2225:Bertrand competition 2210:El Farol Bar problem 2175:Electronic mail game 2140:Lewis signaling game 1684:Hierarchy of beliefs 1500:by Erik van der Werf 1258:"Checkers Is Solved" 928:Solving (6,6)-Kalaha 468:This 8×8 variant of 2611:Bounded rationality 2230:Cournot competition 2180:Rock paper scissors 2155:Battle of the sexes 2145:Volunteer's dilemma 2017:Perfect information 1944:Dominant strategies 1781:Epsilon-equilibrium 1664:Extensive-form game 1274:2007Sci...317.1518S 943:(1901–1902), "Nim, 843:archive.ics.uci.edu 807:134 (2002) 277–311. 623:orders of magnitude 598:, counting the two 448:Strongly solved by 192:rock paper scissors 184:perfect information 66:Ultra-weak solution 2682:Mathematical games 2590:Paranoid algorithm 2570:Alpha–beta pruning 2449:John Maynard Smith 2280:Rendezvous problem 2120:Traveler's dilemma 2110:Gift-exchange game 2105:Prisoner's dilemma 2022:Large Poisson game 1989:Bargaining problem 1894:Backward induction 1866:Subgame perfection 1821:Proper equilibrium 1588:by David Eppstein. 1534:2007-09-30 at the 1480:2009-03-25 at the 1457:Games of no chance 1450:Hilarie K. Orman: 986:Games of No Chance 592:endgame tablebases 513:Preferred Networks 474:Jonathan Schaeffer 420:Three men's morris 268: 239:Vrije Universiteit 204:endgame tablebases 177:backward reasoning 18:Solved board games 2669: 2668: 2575:Aspiration window 2544:Suzanne Scotchmer 2499:Oskar Morgenstern 2394:Donald B. Gillies 2336:Zermelo's theorem 2265:Induction puzzles 2220:Fair cake-cutting 2195:Public goods game 2125:Coordination game 1999:Intransitive game 1929:Forward induction 1811:Pareto efficiency 1791:Gibbs equilibrium 1761:Berge equilibrium 1709:Simultaneous game 1268:(5844): 1518–22. 1178:, by E. Weisstein 1073:wouterkoolen.info 1055:by Jason Doucette 643:swapping strategy 535:Weakly solved by 478:desktop computers 346:Nine men's morris 16:(Redirected from 2704: 2656:Topological game 2651:No-win situation 2549:Thomas Schelling 2529:Robert B. Wilson 2489:Merrill M. Flood 2459:John von Neumann 2369:Ariel Rubinstein 2354:Albert W. Tucker 2205:War of attrition 2165:Matching pennies 1806:Nash equilibrium 1729:Mechanism design 1694:Normal-form game 1649:Cooperative game 1622: 1615: 1608: 1599: 1598: 1560: 1554: 1548: 1545: 1539: 1526: 1520: 1518: 1515:blog.sina.com.cn 1507: 1501: 1498:5×5 Go is solved 1495: 1489: 1484:. Ph.D. Thesis, 1471: 1465: 1448: 1442: 1441: 1439: 1427: 1421: 1420: 1418: 1416: 1411: 1402: 1396: 1395: 1393: 1392: 1386: 1380:. Archived from 1361: 1352: 1346: 1345: 1343: 1342: 1330: 1324: 1323: 1321: 1320: 1310: 1304: 1303: 1285: 1253: 1247: 1246: 1227: 1221: 1215: 1209: 1206:Three Musketeers 1203: 1197: 1196: 1194: 1185: 1179: 1173: 1167: 1166: 1160: 1152: 1150: 1148: 1142: 1131: 1122: 1116: 1115: 1110:. Archived from 1104: 1098: 1097: 1090: 1084: 1083: 1081: 1079: 1070: 1062: 1056: 1050: 1044: 1043: 1036: 1030: 1024: 1018: 1017: 1015: 1014: 1008: 1002:. Archived from 991: 980: 974: 973: 937: 931: 925: 919: 913: 907: 906: 894: 888: 887: 871: 865: 864: 853: 847: 846: 835: 829: 828: 817: 808: 792: 786: 785: 767: 732:Computer Othello 559:Lambs and tigers 463:English draughts 428:Three musketeers 342:Strongly solved. 188:expected outcome 77:non-constructive 21: 2712: 2711: 2707: 2706: 2705: 2703: 2702: 2701: 2672: 2671: 2670: 2665: 2599: 2585:max^n algorithm 2558: 2554:William Vickrey 2514:Reinhard Selten 2469:Kenneth Binmore 2384:David K. Levine 2379:Daniel Kahneman 2346: 2340: 2316:Negamax theorem 2306:Minimax theorem 2284: 2245:Diner's dilemma 2100:All-pay auction 2066: 2052:Stochastic game 2004:Mean-field game 1975: 1968: 1939:Markov strategy 1875: 1741: 1733: 1704:Sequential game 1689:Information set 1674:Game complexity 1644:Congestion game 1632: 1626: 1582: 1568: 1566:Further reading 1563: 1555: 1551: 1546: 1542: 1536:Wayback Machine 1527: 1523: 1509: 1508: 1504: 1496: 1492: 1482:Wayback Machine 1472: 1468: 1449: 1445: 1428: 1424: 1414: 1412: 1409: 1405:Watkins, Mark. 1403: 1399: 1390: 1388: 1384: 1359: 1353: 1349: 1340: 1338: 1331: 1327: 1318: 1316: 1312: 1311: 1307: 1254: 1250: 1228: 1224: 1216: 1212: 1208:, by J. Lemaire 1204: 1200: 1192: 1188:Elabridi, Ali. 1186: 1182: 1174: 1170: 1154: 1153: 1146: 1144: 1140: 1129: 1127:"Solving Renju" 1123: 1119: 1106: 1105: 1101: 1092: 1091: 1087: 1077: 1075: 1068: 1064: 1063: 1059: 1051: 1047: 1038: 1037: 1033: 1029:by Ralph Gasser 1025: 1021: 1012: 1010: 1006: 1000: 989: 981: 977: 963:10.2307/1967631 938: 934: 926: 922: 914: 910: 897:Price, Robert. 895: 891: 872: 868: 855: 854: 850: 837: 836: 832: 825:tromp.github.io 819: 818: 811: 793: 789: 782: 768: 759: 755: 742:God's algorithm 737:Game complexity 718: 655:PSPACE-complete 583: 570: 459: 354:Order and Chaos 229:The variant of 222:(a game of the 216: 164: 100: 98:Strong solution 90: 68: 60:two-player game 56: 28: 23: 22: 15: 12: 11: 5: 2710: 2700: 2699: 2694: 2689: 2684: 2667: 2666: 2664: 2663: 2658: 2653: 2648: 2643: 2638: 2633: 2628: 2623: 2618: 2613: 2607: 2605: 2601: 2600: 2598: 2597: 2592: 2587: 2582: 2577: 2572: 2566: 2564: 2560: 2559: 2557: 2556: 2551: 2546: 2541: 2536: 2531: 2526: 2521: 2519:Robert Axelrod 2516: 2511: 2506: 2501: 2496: 2494:Olga Bondareva 2491: 2486: 2484:Melvin Dresher 2481: 2476: 2474:Leonid Hurwicz 2471: 2466: 2461: 2456: 2451: 2446: 2441: 2436: 2431: 2426: 2421: 2416: 2411: 2409:Harold W. Kuhn 2406: 2401: 2399:Drew Fudenberg 2396: 2391: 2389:David M. Kreps 2386: 2381: 2376: 2374:Claude Shannon 2371: 2366: 2361: 2356: 2350: 2348: 2342: 2341: 2339: 2338: 2333: 2328: 2323: 2318: 2313: 2311:Nash's theorem 2308: 2303: 2298: 2292: 2290: 2286: 2285: 2283: 2282: 2277: 2272: 2267: 2262: 2257: 2252: 2247: 2242: 2237: 2232: 2227: 2222: 2217: 2212: 2207: 2202: 2197: 2192: 2187: 2182: 2177: 2172: 2170:Ultimatum game 2167: 2162: 2157: 2152: 2150:Dollar auction 2147: 2142: 2137: 2135:Centipede game 2132: 2127: 2122: 2117: 2112: 2107: 2102: 2097: 2092: 2090:Infinite chess 2087: 2082: 2076: 2074: 2068: 2067: 2065: 2064: 2059: 2057:Symmetric game 2054: 2049: 2044: 2042:Signaling game 2039: 2037:Screening game 2034: 2029: 2027:Potential game 2024: 2019: 2014: 2006: 2001: 1996: 1991: 1986: 1980: 1978: 1970: 1969: 1967: 1966: 1961: 1956: 1954:Mixed strategy 1951: 1946: 1941: 1936: 1931: 1926: 1921: 1916: 1911: 1906: 1901: 1896: 1891: 1885: 1883: 1877: 1876: 1874: 1873: 1868: 1863: 1858: 1853: 1848: 1843: 1838: 1836:Risk dominance 1833: 1828: 1823: 1818: 1813: 1808: 1803: 1798: 1793: 1788: 1783: 1778: 1773: 1768: 1763: 1758: 1753: 1747: 1745: 1735: 1734: 1732: 1731: 1726: 1721: 1716: 1711: 1706: 1701: 1696: 1691: 1686: 1681: 1679:Graphical game 1676: 1671: 1666: 1661: 1656: 1651: 1646: 1640: 1638: 1634: 1633: 1625: 1624: 1617: 1610: 1602: 1596: 1595: 1589: 1581: 1580:External links 1578: 1577: 1576: 1567: 1564: 1562: 1561: 1549: 1540: 1521: 1502: 1490: 1466: 1443: 1422: 1397: 1372:(3): 369–387. 1347: 1325: 1305: 1248: 1231:Wythoff, W. A. 1222: 1220:, by R. Munroe 1210: 1198: 1180: 1168: 1136:. p. 30. 1117: 1114:on 2004-10-12. 1099: 1085: 1057: 1045: 1031: 1019: 998: 975: 932: 920: 908: 889: 876:"Ghostbusters" 866: 848: 830: 809: 787: 780: 756: 754: 751: 750: 749: 744: 739: 734: 729: 724: 722:Computer chess 717: 714: 713: 712: 693: 677: 673: 667: 666: 631: 626: 619: 614: 603: 584: 579:Main article: 576: 569: 566: 565: 564: 561: 555: 554: 551: 545: 544: 537:Oren Patashnik 533: 527: 526: 523: 517: 516: 509: 502: 501: 498: 492: 491: 488: 482: 481: 466: 458: 455: 454: 453: 446: 444:Wythoff's game 441: 438: 433: 430: 425: 422: 417: 410: 405: 402: 396: 393: 388: 381: 376: 372: 367: 364: 359: 356: 351: 348: 343: 340: 335: 332: 327: 324: 319: 315: 310: 307: 302: 293: 288: 281: 275: 259: 254: 251: 246: 227: 215: 212: 208:Computer chess 163: 160: 109: 108: 99: 96: 95: 94: 89: 86: 85: 84: 67: 64: 55: 52: 26: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2709: 2698: 2695: 2693: 2690: 2688: 2685: 2683: 2680: 2679: 2677: 2662: 2659: 2657: 2654: 2652: 2649: 2647: 2644: 2642: 2639: 2637: 2634: 2632: 2629: 2627: 2624: 2622: 2619: 2617: 2614: 2612: 2609: 2608: 2606: 2604:Miscellaneous 2602: 2596: 2593: 2591: 2588: 2586: 2583: 2581: 2578: 2576: 2573: 2571: 2568: 2567: 2565: 2561: 2555: 2552: 2550: 2547: 2545: 2542: 2540: 2539:Samuel Bowles 2537: 2535: 2534:Roger Myerson 2532: 2530: 2527: 2525: 2524:Robert Aumann 2522: 2520: 2517: 2515: 2512: 2510: 2507: 2505: 2502: 2500: 2497: 2495: 2492: 2490: 2487: 2485: 2482: 2480: 2479:Lloyd Shapley 2477: 2475: 2472: 2470: 2467: 2465: 2464:Kenneth Arrow 2462: 2460: 2457: 2455: 2452: 2450: 2447: 2445: 2444:John Harsanyi 2442: 2440: 2437: 2435: 2432: 2430: 2427: 2425: 2422: 2420: 2417: 2415: 2414:Herbert Simon 2412: 2410: 2407: 2405: 2402: 2400: 2397: 2395: 2392: 2390: 2387: 2385: 2382: 2380: 2377: 2375: 2372: 2370: 2367: 2365: 2362: 2360: 2357: 2355: 2352: 2351: 2349: 2343: 2337: 2334: 2332: 2329: 2327: 2324: 2322: 2319: 2317: 2314: 2312: 2309: 2307: 2304: 2302: 2299: 2297: 2294: 2293: 2291: 2287: 2281: 2278: 2276: 2273: 2271: 2268: 2266: 2263: 2261: 2258: 2256: 2253: 2251: 2248: 2246: 2243: 2241: 2238: 2236: 2233: 2231: 2228: 2226: 2223: 2221: 2218: 2216: 2215:Fair division 2213: 2211: 2208: 2206: 2203: 2201: 2198: 2196: 2193: 2191: 2190:Dictator game 2188: 2186: 2183: 2181: 2178: 2176: 2173: 2171: 2168: 2166: 2163: 2161: 2158: 2156: 2153: 2151: 2148: 2146: 2143: 2141: 2138: 2136: 2133: 2131: 2128: 2126: 2123: 2121: 2118: 2116: 2113: 2111: 2108: 2106: 2103: 2101: 2098: 2096: 2093: 2091: 2088: 2086: 2083: 2081: 2078: 2077: 2075: 2073: 2069: 2063: 2062:Zero-sum game 2060: 2058: 2055: 2053: 2050: 2048: 2045: 2043: 2040: 2038: 2035: 2033: 2032:Repeated game 2030: 2028: 2025: 2023: 2020: 2018: 2015: 2013: 2011: 2007: 2005: 2002: 2000: 1997: 1995: 1992: 1990: 1987: 1985: 1982: 1981: 1979: 1977: 1971: 1965: 1962: 1960: 1957: 1955: 1952: 1950: 1949:Pure strategy 1947: 1945: 1942: 1940: 1937: 1935: 1932: 1930: 1927: 1925: 1922: 1920: 1917: 1915: 1914:De-escalation 1912: 1910: 1907: 1905: 1902: 1900: 1897: 1895: 1892: 1890: 1887: 1886: 1884: 1882: 1878: 1872: 1869: 1867: 1864: 1862: 1859: 1857: 1856:Shapley value 1854: 1852: 1849: 1847: 1844: 1842: 1839: 1837: 1834: 1832: 1829: 1827: 1824: 1822: 1819: 1817: 1814: 1812: 1809: 1807: 1804: 1802: 1799: 1797: 1794: 1792: 1789: 1787: 1784: 1782: 1779: 1777: 1774: 1772: 1769: 1767: 1764: 1762: 1759: 1757: 1754: 1752: 1749: 1748: 1746: 1744: 1740: 1736: 1730: 1727: 1725: 1724:Succinct game 1722: 1720: 1717: 1715: 1712: 1710: 1707: 1705: 1702: 1700: 1697: 1695: 1692: 1690: 1687: 1685: 1682: 1680: 1677: 1675: 1672: 1670: 1667: 1665: 1662: 1660: 1657: 1655: 1652: 1650: 1647: 1645: 1642: 1641: 1639: 1635: 1631: 1623: 1618: 1616: 1611: 1609: 1604: 1603: 1600: 1593: 1592:GamesCrafters 1590: 1587: 1584: 1583: 1574: 1570: 1569: 1559:by Ed Gilbert 1558: 1553: 1544: 1537: 1533: 1530: 1525: 1516: 1512: 1506: 1499: 1494: 1487: 1483: 1479: 1476: 1473:Yew Jin Lim. 1470: 1463: 1459: 1458: 1453: 1447: 1438: 1433: 1426: 1408: 1401: 1387:on 2016-03-04 1383: 1379: 1375: 1371: 1367: 1366: 1358: 1351: 1336: 1329: 1315: 1309: 1301: 1297: 1293: 1289: 1284: 1279: 1275: 1271: 1267: 1263: 1259: 1252: 1244: 1240: 1236: 1232: 1226: 1219: 1214: 1207: 1202: 1191: 1184: 1177: 1172: 1164: 1158: 1139: 1135: 1128: 1121: 1113: 1109: 1103: 1095: 1089: 1074: 1067: 1061: 1054: 1049: 1041: 1035: 1028: 1023: 1009:on 2015-07-24 1005: 1001: 999:9780521574112 995: 988: 987: 979: 972: 968: 964: 960: 957:(14): 35–39, 956: 952: 951: 946: 942: 941:Bouton, C. L. 936: 929: 924: 917: 916:Solving Kalah 912: 904: 900: 893: 885: 881: 877: 870: 862: 858: 852: 844: 840: 834: 826: 822: 816: 814: 806: 802: 801: 796: 791: 783: 777: 773: 766: 764: 762: 757: 748: 745: 743: 740: 738: 735: 733: 730: 728: 725: 723: 720: 719: 710: 706: 702: 698: 694: 692: 690: 686: 682: 678: 674: 672: 669: 668: 664: 660: 656: 652: 648: 644: 640: 636: 632: 630: 627: 624: 620: 618: 615: 612: 608: 604: 601: 597: 593: 589: 585: 582: 581:Solving chess 577: 575: 572: 571: 562: 560: 557: 556: 552: 550: 547: 546: 542: 538: 534: 532: 529: 528: 524: 522: 519: 518: 514: 510: 507: 504: 503: 499: 497: 494: 493: 489: 487: 484: 483: 479: 475: 471: 467: 464: 461: 460: 451: 450:W. A. Wythoff 447: 445: 442: 439: 437: 434: 431: 429: 426: 423: 421: 418: 415: 411: 409: 406: 403: 400: 397: 394: 392: 389: 386: 382: 380: 377: 373: 371: 368: 365: 363: 360: 357: 355: 352: 349: 347: 344: 341: 339: 336: 333: 331: 328: 325: 323: 320: 316: 314: 311: 308: 306: 303: 300: 299: 294: 292: 289: 286: 282: 280: 276: 272: 264: 260: 258: 255: 252: 250: 247: 244: 240: 236: 232: 228: 225: 221: 218: 217: 211: 209: 205: 201: 196: 193: 189: 185: 180: 178: 173: 169: 159: 157: 153: 149: 143: 141: 137: 133: 128: 126: 122: 117: 113: 106: 102: 101: 92: 91: 88:Weak solution 82: 78: 74: 70: 69: 63: 61: 51: 49: 45: 41: 37: 33: 19: 2697:Solved games 2509:Peyton Young 2504:Paul Milgrom 2419:Hervé Moulin 2359:Amos Tversky 2301:Folk theorem 2012:-player game 2009: 1934:Grim trigger 1718: 1572: 1552: 1543: 1524: 1514: 1505: 1493: 1469: 1455: 1451: 1446: 1425: 1413:. Retrieved 1400: 1389:. Retrieved 1382:the original 1369: 1363: 1350: 1339:. Retrieved 1328: 1317:. Retrieved 1308: 1265: 1261: 1251: 1245:(2): 199–202 1242: 1238: 1225: 1213: 1201: 1183: 1171: 1145:. Retrieved 1133: 1120: 1112:the original 1102: 1088: 1076:. Retrieved 1072: 1060: 1048: 1034: 1022: 1011:. Retrieved 1004:the original 985: 978: 954: 948: 944: 935: 923: 911: 902: 892: 883: 879: 869: 860: 851: 842: 833: 824: 804: 798: 790: 781:90-9007488-0 771: 708: 704: 700: 688: 684: 680: 662: 658: 650: 646: 637:(as used by 541:Victor Allis 496:Losing chess 296: 285:Victor Allis 271:Victor Allis 257:Connect Four 214:Solved games 197: 181: 172:perfect play 171: 165: 162:Perfect play 144: 129: 118: 114: 110: 105:perfect play 73:perfect play 57: 31: 29: 2626:Coopetition 2429:Jean Tirole 2424:John Conway 2404:Eric Maskin 2200:Blotto game 2185:Pirate game 1994:Global game 1964:Tit for tat 1899:Bid shading 1889:Appeasement 1739:Equilibrium 1719:Solved game 1654:Determinacy 1637:Definitions 1630:game theory 1218:Tic-Tac-Toe 1078:29 February 727:Computer Go 539:(1980) and 521:Pentominoes 457:Weak-solves 436:Tic-tac-toe 168:game theory 132:tic-tac-toe 32:solved game 2676:Categories 2270:Trust game 2255:Kuhn poker 1924:Escalation 1919:Deterrence 1909:Cheap talk 1881:Strategies 1699:Preference 1628:Topics of 1437:2310.19387 1415:17 January 1391:2015-04-08 1341:2020-12-06 1319:2007-07-19 1013:2022-01-03 899:"Hexapawn" 861:github.com 753:References 602:as pieces. 465:(checkers) 414:Guy Steele 412:Solved by 283:Solved by 249:Chopsticks 2454:John Nash 2160:Stag hunt 1904:Collusion 880:Word Ways 639:John Nash 508:(Reversi) 243:Amsterdam 235:Henri Bal 195:outcome. 125:game tree 2595:Lazy SMP 2289:Theorems 2240:Deadlock 2095:Checkers 1976:of games 1743:concepts 1532:Archived 1478:Archived 1300:10274228 1292:17641166 1233:(1907), 1157:cite web 1147:24 April 1138:Archived 1108:"Quarto" 1066:"Quarto" 716:See also 596:endgames 486:Fanorona 470:draughts 452:in 1907. 305:Hexapawn 301:in 1987. 54:Overview 2347:figures 2130:Chicken 1984:Auction 1974:Classes 1571:Allis, 1488:, 2007. 1270:Bibcode 1262:Science 971:1967631 506:Othello 379:Pentago 362:Ohvalhu 226:family) 224:Mancala 200:endgame 121:minimax 1298:  1290:  996:  969:  778:  391:Quarto 375:moves. 370:Pangki 322:L game 318:cases. 279:gomoku 2085:Chess 2072:Games 1432:arXiv 1410:(PDF) 1385:(PDF) 1360:(PDF) 1296:S2CID 1193:(PDF) 1176:Teeko 1141:(PDF) 1130:(PDF) 1069:(PDF) 1007:(PDF) 990:(PDF) 967:JSTOR 691:-game 605:Some 600:kings 574:Chess 531:Qubic 408:Teeko 399:Renju 385:NERSC 313:Kalah 291:Ghost 277:Free 274:2024. 231:Oware 220:Awari 152:Chomp 34:is a 1766:Core 1417:2017 1288:PMID 1163:link 1149:2024 1080:2024 994:ISBN 886:(4). 776:ISBN 711:≥ 8. 40:draw 36:game 2345:Key 1462:pdf 1454:in 1374:doi 1278:doi 1266:317 959:doi 947:", 629:Hex 549:Sim 338:Nim 241:in 175:By 166:In 156:Hex 154:or 136:nim 2678:: 2080:Go 1513:. 1368:. 1362:. 1294:. 1286:. 1276:. 1264:. 1260:. 1241:, 1237:, 1159:}} 1155:{{ 1132:. 1071:. 965:, 953:, 901:. 884:20 882:. 878:. 859:. 841:. 823:. 812:^ 803:, 760:^ 661:×( 633:A 617:Go 590:, 170:, 142:. 58:A 30:A 2010:n 1621:e 1614:t 1607:v 1517:. 1464:. 1440:. 1434:: 1419:. 1394:. 1376:: 1370:4 1344:. 1322:. 1302:. 1280:: 1272:: 1243:7 1195:. 1165:) 1151:. 1096:. 1082:. 1042:. 1016:. 961:: 955:3 905:. 863:. 845:. 827:. 784:. 709:k 705:k 701:k 689:k 687:, 685:n 683:, 681:m 663:N 659:N 651:N 649:× 647:N 20:)

Index

Solved board games
game
draw
abstract strategy games
combinatorial game theory
two-player game
perfect play
non-constructive
strategy-stealing argument
perfect play
minimax
game tree
tic-tac-toe
nim
combinatorial game theory
Maharajah and the Sepoys
Chomp
Hex
game theory
backward reasoning
perfect information
expected outcome
rock paper scissors
endgame
endgame tablebases
Computer chess
Awari
Mancala
Oware
Henri Bal

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.