Author: Gerrit Reubold
Date: 09:39:22 09/27/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 27, 2002 at 12:10:53, Rolf Tueschen wrote:
>On September 27, 2002 at 11:44:29, Gerrit Reubold wrote:
>
>>On September 27, 2002 at 11:35:22, Rolf Tueschen wrote:
>>
>>>On September 27, 2002 at 11:09:41, Gerrit Reubold wrote:
>>>
>>>>Perhaps we should play such a game against each other, the one who is right will
>>>>get rich, the other will get poor :-)
>>>>
>>>>Greetings, Gerrit
>>>
>>>Gerrit, there is no game at all. There is one single trial. Will you be ready to
>>>consider now?
>>
>>A single event is a game, too.
>>
>>>
>>>Rolf Tueschen
>>>
>>>P.S. In a long serie of many trials, in the end the strategy to always switch is
>>>the best, right? But not in the single event. There it's 50:50.
>>
>>Of course I would be willing to play a game with only a single event. I don't
>>understand why you make a difference between probabilities of single events and
>>probabilities of events which are in a series of events.
>>
>>Greetings,
>>Gerrit
>
>That is not for making people confused but it's simple maths. Since you asked
>for the claimed SSDF relevance, let me explain that I have their technique in
>mind when I see people quickly making their simulations. The problem for the
>candidate in the game show however has no aspects allowing probability
>researches. I think I proved that the take-away of 1 door or 8 cups or 998999
>doors diesn't change that after this the two remaining "things" have the same
>"probability" namely 1/2. I see also people make typical mistakes in relation to
>the apples and beans warning.
> They argue that the moment the candidate had
>chosen a door, then this door is from now on by definition no longer a member of
>the doors on the other side. So it has become a "frafra" and then hen the host
>is taking away doors on the one side, it's clear that our frafr can't get some
>propbability point back like all the other over 900000 doors!Of course this is a
>complete delusion.
I don't know what a "frafra" is. I think this argument ("chosen door can't get
prob. point back") is OK and not a delusion.
We are perhaps talking about different games. NOTE: I don't know about the Monty
Hall show and his rules. I discuss the following "game":
- the candidate chooses one door.
- the host opens a door, but not the chosen one.
- He must open a door!
- The opened door does NOT have the car (otherwise the situation is
uninteresting).
- The candidate is offered to switch
Is this the game which you are discussing, too?
Greetings,
Gerrit
>
>The same delusion when SSDF is making a ranking list out of different species
>individuals. We have 8 modern combinations. With all the stuff involved and we
>have embryos and saurians and intelligent sand and whatever. And all play chess
>games against each other! And this is accepted because the actual best and
>commercialy interesting progs are on the 8 best places. Big surprise, no?!
>
>Rolf Tueschen
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.