minesweeper - place your bets | The Coffeehouse

Matthew van Eerde
AKA Maurits

Sven Groot
My name has 9 letters. Coincidence? I think not...

Uhm... that's a tough one.

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

Sven Groot wrote:
Uhm... that's a tough one.

There are no cells which target any two cells of the four, so it's down to guesswork. But we know there is at least one mined cell in each set of two unknowns.

Personally, I'd go for the 1337 approach.

littleguru
<3 Seattle

Looks like all could be the ones... heh. I never liked Minesweeper Big Smile

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

littleguru wrote:
Looks like all could be the ones... heh. I never liked Minesweeper

No, the counter says there's 2 mines left, but there's 4 unknown cells.

But the two "3" cell indicators mean that in either set of two unknown cells lies a mine.

So it's 2*(50/50) either way, so you've got a 1/4 chance of winning by clicking randomly.

evildictaitor
if( !succeed( try() ) ) { while(true) try(); }

W3bbo wrote:

So it's 2*(50/50) either way, so you've got a 1/4 chance of winning by clicking randomly.

Check your stats. That's not true. You have a 1/4 chance of winning by clicking strategically. It's a 1/6 chance if you click twice randomly.

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

evildictaitor wrote:

W3bbo wrote:
So it's 2*(50/50) either way, so you've got a 1/4 chance of winning by clicking randomly.

Check your stats. That's not true. You have a 1/4 chance of winning by clicking strategically. It's a 1/6 chance if you click twice randomly.

If by "randomly" you also include the possibility of clicking the cell which is mathematically proven to be mined, then yes.

Damn you, and your strict definitions.

evildictaitor
if( !succeed( try() ) ) { while(true) try(); }

W3bbo wrote:

If by "randomly" you also include the possibility of clicking the cell which is mathematically proven to be mined, then yes.

Damn you, and your strict definitions.

Hehe. I love maths. It formalizes my inate sense of pedantry.

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

evildictaitor wrote:

W3bbo wrote:
If by "randomly" you also include the possibility of clicking the cell which is mathematically proven to be mined, then yes.

Damn you, and your strict definitions.

Hehe. I love maths. It formalizes my inate sense of pedantry.

I'd like to see that in proof form.

evildictaitor
if( !succeed( try() ) ) { while(true) try(); }

W3bbo wrote:

evildictaitor wrote:
W3bbo wrote:
If by "randomly" you also include the possibility of clicking the cell which is mathematically proven to be mined, then yes.

Damn you, and your strict definitions.

Hehe. I love maths. It formalizes my inate sense of pedantry.

I'd like to see that in proof form.

For every ω-consistent recursive class κ of FORMULAS there exists zero or more functions F₁ .. F_n such that F_i is in Flg(κ) and v = F1(...Fn(p)) such that p is in κ where v is a free-variable of κ.

stevo_
Human after all

You two should get a room..

evildictaitor
if( !succeed( try() ) ) { while(true) try(); }

stevo_ wrote:
You two should get a room..

There does not exist a room such that ...

Rowan
Look, no errors.


+-+-+-+

|X| |x|

+-+-+-+

|x|3|1|

+-+-+-+

| |1| |

+-+-+-+

Minh
WOOH! WOOH!

Minh' wrote:

Girlfriend, let's place bets if he has one?

Oh how cute. I've got my own stalker.

GoddersUK
I CAN has cheezburger and you CAN'T has stop me!

As has la bomba by the look of it.

Yeah guys... it was funny the first time round with the fake Jeff Sandquist, but now it's just getting lame.

Bas
It finds lightbulbs.

So, how did Matthew's game end? Or is he still contemplating his move?

W3bbo
The Master of Baiters

Bas wrote:
So, how did Matthew's game end? Or is he still contemplating his move?

When the clock hits 999 you lose.

Minh
WOOH! WOOH!

Bas wrote:
So, how did Matthew's game end? Or is he still contemplating his move?

I'm writing an analytical engine right now... Should have an answer in a few hours:

evildictaitor
if( !succeed( try() ) ) { while(true) try(); }

Minh wrote:

Bas wrote:So, how did Matthew's game end? Or is he still contemplating his move?
I'm writing an analytical engine right now... Should have an answer in a few hours:

Are you aware that the answer can't be computed, and that's where the problem lies? Both of the adjacent un-clicked cells have exactly one mine between them and there is not enough information to distinguish which one of them has it.

Bas
It finds lightbulbs.

W3bbo wrote:

Bas wrote: So, how did Matthew's game end? Or is he still contemplating his move?

When the clock hits 999 you lose.

He could have been running in a virtual machine. The he would have taken a screenshot, saved the machine's state, closed it, and waited for a satisfactory answer before reloading the machine state.

Roald Falcon

It looks to me that the odds of winning are 50%, but only if one of the inner squares is clicked. That is because if the square doesn't contain a mine, it will reveal the location of both the remaining mines, allowing the game to be won.

Beginning with an outer square provides no information on the other pair, thus reducing odds of winning the game to 25%.

Minh
WOOH! WOOH!

evildictaitor wrote:

Minh wrote:
Bas wrote:So, how did Matthew's game end? Or is he still contemplating his move?
I'm writing an analytical engine right now... Should have an answer in a few hours:

Are you aware that the answer can't be computed, and that's where the problem lies? Both of the adjacent un-clicked cells have exactly one mine between them and there is not enough information to distinguish which one of them has it.

I'm doing a histogram to see which cell is more likely to be assigned to.

It's well known that the future is the the past * a variable.

A few more million iterations & I should have the answer...

Minh
WOOH! WOOH!

Movie of MineSweeperAnalytical Engine 2000. I'm so close.

evildictaitor
if( !succeed( try() ) ) { while(true) try(); }

Minh wrote:
I'm doing a histogram to see which cell is more likely to be assigned to.

Then you are no doubt aware that it is using the random() function which is pseudo-random up to eight digits and thus you won't be able to work it out by brute-force statistical measurement?

Minh
WOOH! WOOH!

evildictaitor wrote:

Minh wrote:I'm doing a histogram to see which cell is more likely to be assigned to.

Then you are no doubt aware that it is using the random() function which is pseudo-random up to eight digits and thus you won't be able to work it out by brute-force statistical measurement?

It's OK... I have a feeling that MineSweep.exe also uses a pseudorandom method Wink