Browse · MathNet
PrintBMO 2019 Shortlist
2019 counting and probability
Problem
Anna and Bob play a game on the set of all points of the form where are integers with . Let us call the lines and the boundary lines of the game. The points of these lines are called the boundary points. The neighbours of point are the points , , , .
Anna starts with a token at the origin . With Bob playing first, they alternately perform the following steps: At his turn, Bob deletes two points on each boundary line. On her turn Anna makes a sequence of three moves of the token, where a move of the token consists of picking up the token from its current position and placing it in one of its neighbours.
To win the game Anna must place her token on a boundary point before it is deleted by Bob. Does Anna have a winning strategy?
[Note: At every turn except perhaps her last, Anna must make exactly three moves.]
Anna starts with a token at the origin . With Bob playing first, they alternately perform the following steps: At his turn, Bob deletes two points on each boundary line. On her turn Anna makes a sequence of three moves of the token, where a move of the token consists of picking up the token from its current position and placing it in one of its neighbours.
To win the game Anna must place her token on a boundary point before it is deleted by Bob. Does Anna have a winning strategy?
[Note: At every turn except perhaps her last, Anna must make exactly three moves.]
Solution
Anna does not have a winning strategy. We will provide a winning strategy for Bob. It is enough to describe his strategy for the deletions on the line .
Bob starts by deleting and . Once Anna completes her step, he deletes the next two available points on the left if Anna decreased her -coordinate, the next two available points on the right if Anna increased her -coordinate, and the next available point to the left and the next available point to the right if Anna did not change her -coordinate. The only exception to the above rule is on the very first time Anna decreases by exactly 1. In that step, Bob deletes the next available point to the left and the next available point to the right.
Bob's strategy guarantees the following: If Anna makes a sequence of steps reaching with and the exact opposite sequence of moves in the horizontal direction reaching then Bob deletes at least as many points to the left of in the first sequence than points to the right of in the second sequence.
So we may assume for contradiction that Anna wins by placing her token at for some .
Define where is the total number of points deleted by Bob to the right of , and is the position of Anna's token.
For each sequence of steps performed first by Anna and then by Bob, does not decrease. This can be seen by looking at the following table exhibiting the changes in and . We have excluded the cases where .
The table also shows that if in this sequence of steps Anna changes by or then is increased by 1. Also, if Anna changes by or then the first time this happens is increased by 2. (This also holds if her move is or which are not shown in the table.)
---
Since Anna wins by placing her token at we must have and . So at that exact moment we have: So in her last turn she must have decreased by at least 4. So her last step must have been or which give a decrease of 4 and 5 respectively. (It could not be because then she must have already won. Also she could not have done just one or two moves in her last turn since this is not enough for the required decrease in .)
If her last step was then just before doing it we had and . This means that in one of her steps the total change in was not . However in that case we have seen that , a contradiction.
If her last step was then just before doing it we had and or . So she must have made at least two steps with the change of being or or at least one step with the change of being or . In both cases, consulting the table, we get an increase of at least 2 in , a contradiction.
Bob starts by deleting and . Once Anna completes her step, he deletes the next two available points on the left if Anna decreased her -coordinate, the next two available points on the right if Anna increased her -coordinate, and the next available point to the left and the next available point to the right if Anna did not change her -coordinate. The only exception to the above rule is on the very first time Anna decreases by exactly 1. In that step, Bob deletes the next available point to the left and the next available point to the right.
Bob's strategy guarantees the following: If Anna makes a sequence of steps reaching with and the exact opposite sequence of moves in the horizontal direction reaching then Bob deletes at least as many points to the left of in the first sequence than points to the right of in the second sequence.
So we may assume for contradiction that Anna wins by placing her token at for some .
Define where is the total number of points deleted by Bob to the right of , and is the position of Anna's token.
For each sequence of steps performed first by Anna and then by Bob, does not decrease. This can be seen by looking at the following table exhibiting the changes in and . We have excluded the cases where .
| Step | (0,3) | (1,2) | (-1,2) | (2,1) | (0,1) | (3,0) | (1,0) | (2,-1) | (1,-2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 0 (or 1) | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
| 3 | 6 | 0 (or 3) | 6 | 3 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | |
| 3 | 4 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 0 |
---
Since Anna wins by placing her token at we must have and . So at that exact moment we have: So in her last turn she must have decreased by at least 4. So her last step must have been or which give a decrease of 4 and 5 respectively. (It could not be because then she must have already won. Also she could not have done just one or two moves in her last turn since this is not enough for the required decrease in .)
If her last step was then just before doing it we had and . This means that in one of her steps the total change in was not . However in that case we have seen that , a contradiction.
If her last step was then just before doing it we had and or . So she must have made at least two steps with the change of being or or at least one step with the change of being or . In both cases, consulting the table, we get an increase of at least 2 in , a contradiction.
Final answer
Anna does not have a winning strategy.
Techniques
Invariants / monovariantsGames / greedy algorithms