(博奕論)北海道大學入學試題,1至100選最大數字

如果少人同frd玩 將個range限到1-10得唔得

一對一 終極心理戰

實填10喎

咁如果人地都係咁諗呢？
同埋有賭注會難玩好多

佢都填10咁咪打和囉，冇蝕底喎

如果輸咗或者打和都要死 你會點揀
我覺得好難 10又唔係 9又唔係咁 好迷惘

77

撞左了

如果少人同frd玩 將個range限到1-10得唔得

一對一 終極心理戰

實填10喎

咁如果人地都係咁諗呢？
同埋有賭注會難玩好多

佢都填10咁咪打和囉，冇蝕底喎

如果輸咗或者打和都要死 你會點揀
我覺得好難 10又唔係 9又唔係咁 好迷惘

你諗清楚先啦

pm

lm

77

撞左了

Ok 訓得

73

撞左

73

撞左

安心訓了

87

27
有無同道中人

如果少人同frd玩 將個range限到1-10得唔得

一對一 終極心理戰

實填10喎

咁如果人地都係咁諗呢？
同埋有賭注會難玩好多

佢都填10咁咪打和囉，冇蝕底喎

如果輸咗或者打和都要死 你會點揀
我覺得好難 10又唔係 9又唔係咁 好迷惘

咁自己就死硬 問題變成你想唔想佢死

如果少人同frd玩 將個range限到1-10得唔得

一對一 終極心理戰

實填10喎

咁如果人地都係咁諗呢？
同埋有賭注會難玩好多

佢都填10咁咪打和囉，冇蝕底喎

如果輸咗或者打和都要死 你會點揀
我覺得好難 10又唔係 9又唔係咁 好迷惘

你諗清楚先啦

邊part

Game Theory 既 nash equilibrium
根本隻 game 都唔係考你係咪真係搵到個數字，而係你答果個數字 係需要基於邏輯推理而得出
所以做一萬次測試都好，model answer 都只會得一個，就係 100

如果少人同frd玩 將個range限到1-10得唔得

一對一 終極心理戰

實填10喎

咁如果人地都係咁諗呢？
同埋有賭注會難玩好多

佢都填10咁咪打和囉，冇蝕底喎

如果輸咗或者打和都要死 你會點揀
我覺得好難 10又唔係 9又唔係咁 好迷惘

咁自己就死硬 問題變成你想唔想佢死

係喎 又係攬炒難題
咁就會老閪都揀10 如果人地揀咗10我唔揀咗10 就會得我死

填左59

92

99.99999999999999999999999999999999999

無話唔比小數

99.99999999999999999999999999999999999

幫你一把

92

fk

咁易撞

太長唔想用中文打

The strategy of choosing 100 is a weakly dominant strategy.

Consider a player, Alice. We only need to consider two cases:

Case 1: The largest number chosen by the rest of the group is strictly less than 100. Then, Alice can always win by choosing 100, but if she may lose if she chooses a number less than 100.

Case 2: The largest number chosen by the rest of the group is 100. Then, Alice will lose no matter which number she chooses, so she is indifferent between all possible strategies.

The conclusion means that all (rational) players should choose 100, leading to a Nash equilibrium outcome in which all players gain zero point.

實際上唔係

it sounds good but it never works

好明顯考你既唔係實際你填既數字而係背後既concept
呢個咪就係正確答案

study下Nash Equilibrium先啦

但嗰位巴打case 2 根本已經fail咗，因為如果有兩個人揀100得佢揀99，佢贏架

71

https://youtu.be/2BFg2uZJcyo

雖然唔係幾關事 但係比大家討論下

如果得2個人玩，一係攬炒，一係成人之美
冇咩意思

同埋如果話選最少人選更無意思，因為鬥大呢樣野已經係令人寫嘅範圍同諗嘅對策縮緊到某階段
而最少人選只係鳩撞，唔使點諗