Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd
Upload
38 views

Math Assignment Help: For Any Help Related Queries, Call Us At: - +1 678 648 4277 You Can Mail Us At:-Or Reach Us At

For any help related queries, call us at: – +1 678 648 4277. You can mail us at:- support@mathhomeworksolver.com or reach us at:- https://www.mathhomeworksolver.com/ This document provides solutions to 4 math problems involving induction proofs and game theory strategies. It proves inequalities using induction, divides student groups using strong induction, analyzes a game called Mininim using strong induction, and considers strategies for a subset takeaway game.

Uploaded by

Math Homework Solver
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
38 views

Math Assignment Help: For Any Help Related Queries, Call Us At: - +1 678 648 4277 You Can Mail Us At:-Or Reach Us At

For any help related queries, call us at: – +1 678 648 4277. You can mail us at:- support@mathhomeworksolver.com or reach us at:- https://www.mathhomeworksolver.com/ This document provides solutions to 4 math problems involving induction proofs and game theory strategies. It proves inequalities using induction, divides student groups using strong induction, analyzes a game called Mininim using strong induction, and considers strategies for a subset takeaway game.

Uploaded by

Math Homework Solver
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 8

For any help related queries, call us at: – 

+1 678 648 4277


You can mail us at:- support@mathhomeworksolver.com or
reach us at:- https://www.mathhomeworksolver.com/

MATH ASSIGNMENT HELP


Problem 1.

Use induction to prove that the following inequality holds for


all integers n≥ 1.

Solution.

We use induction. Let P(n) be the proposition that:

First, we prove P(0). In this case, both side of the inequality


are equal to 1/2, and so the inequality holds. Next, for each
n≥ 0, we must show that P(n) implies P(n+1). Assume that
P(n) is true. Then we can reason as follows:
The first step uses the induction hypothesis, P(n). The
second step uses the fact that (2n+3)/(2n+2)>1for all n≥ 1.
Therefore, by induction, the proposition P(n) is true for all
n≥ 1, and the claim is proved.

Problem 2.

This term in 6.042, we’re constantly trying to divide a class


of n students into groups of either 4 or 5 students.

(a) Let’s try to use strong induction prove that a class with
n ≥ 8students can be divided into groups of 4 or 5.

Proof. The proof is by strong induction. Let P(n) be the


proposition that a recitation with n students can be
divided into teams of 4 or 5.

First, we prove that P(n)is true for n= 8, 9, or 10 by


showing how to break classes of these sizes into groups
of 4 or 5 students:

8 = 4+4
9 = 4+5
10 = 5+5
Next, we must show that P(8),...,P(n) imply P(n +1)for all
n≥ 10. Thus, we assume that P(8),...,P(n)are all true and
show how to divide up a class of n +1students into groups
of 4 or 5. We first form one group of 4 students. Then we
can divide the remaining n− 3students into groups of 4 or 5
by the assumption P(n− 3). This proves P(n+1), and so the
claim holds by induction.

This proof contains a critical logical error. (In fact, the


claim is false!) Identify the first sentence in the proof that
does not follow and explain what went wrong.

Solution.

The first error is in the sentence:

Then we can divide the remaining n − 3students into groups


of 4 or 5 by the assumption P(n − 3).

If n=10, then P(n − 3)=P(7), which is not among our


assumptions P(8),...,P(n). In this case, P(n +1)=P(11)is
actually false.
(b) Provide a correct strong induction proof that a class
with n≥ 12students can be divided into groups of 4 or 5.

Solution.

The proof is by strong induction. Let P(n)be the proposition


that a recitation with n students can be divided into teams
of 4 or 5.

First, we prove that P(n) is true for n =12, 13, 14, and 15 by
showing how to break classes of these sizes into groups of
4 or 5 students:

12=4+4+4
13=4+4+5
14=4+5+5
15=5+5+5

Next, we must show that P(12),...,P(n)imply P(n+1)for all


n≥ 15. Thus, we assume that P(12),...,P(n)are all true and
show how to divide up a class of n+1students. We first
form one group of 4 students. Then we can divide the
remaining n− 3students into groups of 4 or 5 by the
assumption P(n− 3). (Note that n≥ 15and so n− 3≥ 12; thus,
P(n− 3)is among our assumptions P(12),...,P(n).) This
proves P(n+1), and so the claim holds by induction.
Problem 3.

The game of Mininim is defined as follows: Some positive


number of sticks are placed on the ground. Two players take
turns removing one, two, or three sticks. The player to
remove the last one loses.
Use strong induction to show that:
The second player has a winning strategy if the number of
sticks, equals 4k+1for some k∈ N; otherwise, the first player
has a winning strategy.

Solution.
The induction hypothesis, P(n), is:

If n=4k+1, for some k∈ N, then the second player has a


winning strategy; otherwise, the first player has a winning
strategy.

We proceed by strong induction, starting from 1.

Base case: n=1. The first player has no choice but to remove
1stick and lose, which is what the theorem says for this case.

Strong inductive step: Suppose the theorem is true for


numbers 1through nand show that it is true for n+1. For the
inductive step, there are four cases:
• n+1=4k+1: show that the first player loses. We’ve already
handled the base case (1) so we can assume n+1≥ 5. Consider
what the first player might do to win: he can choose to
remove 1, 2 or 3 sticks. If he removes one stick, the
remaining number of sticks is n=4k. By strong induction, the
player who plays at this point has a winning strategy. So the
player who played first will lose. Similarly, if the first player
removes two sticks, the remaining number is 4(k− 1)+3.
Again, he loses, by the same reasoning. Similarly, by
removing 3sticks, he loses. So, however the first player
moves, he loses.

• n+1 =4k: show that the first player can win. Have the first
player remove 3 sticks: the second player then sees 4(k−1)+1
sticks, and loses, by the strong inductive hypothesis.

• n+1 =4k+2: show that the first player can win. Have the
first player remove 1 stick: the second player then sees 4k+ 1
sticks, and loses as in the previous case.

• n+1 =4k+3: show that the first player can win. Have the
first player remove 2 sticks: again, the second player sees
4k+1 sticks and loses.

So in any case, P(n+1) is true, and by strong induction, we


conclude that P(n) holds for all n≥ 1.
Problem 4.
Consider the following equivalent way of viewing the subset
takeaway game from the inclass problem on Friday, Week 2:
for a fixed, finite set, A, let S initially be all the proper
subsets of A. Players alternately choose a set B∈ S and
remove Band all sets that contain Bfrom S; they then
continue playing on the updated S. The player that chooses
the last set in S wins.
(a) Use the wellordering property to show that, in any game,
one of the players must have a winning strategy. Hint:
Consider games whose initial set, S, is an arbitrary collec
tion of subsets of, A, not necessarily all the proper
subsets of A. Reach a contradiction by considering a
minimum size game with no winning strategy for either
player. What is a useful measure of size of a game?

Solution.
Let Sbe the smallest collection such that neither player
has a winning strategy. Consider the state after each
possible first move by player 1. No such state can
correspond to a winning position for player 1 since that
would mean a winning strategy for player 1 on S. Nor
can every such state be a winning position for player 2
since that would mean player 2 has a winning strategy on
S. Hence, at least one such state must have no winning
strategies for both players. But this state is a smaller
collection than S, contradiction.
Thus, by the W.O.P, some player must have a winning
strategy for any collection S, and for the proper subsets of
Ain particular.

(b) If the whole set Ais a possible move in a game, explain


why the 1st player must have a winning strategy.

Solution.

We reason by cases to show that player 1 has a winning


strategy. Suppose game Gincludes Aas a possible move. Let
G’ be the same game as Gexcept that Ais removed from the
set of possible moves.

Case 1: Player 1 has a winning strategy in the game G’.


Then the first move of Player 1’s winning strategy will also
be a legal move in game G. Moreover, after this move in
game G, the set Awill no longer be a possible move, so the
move will lead to the same winning situation for Player 1 as
in game G’. So Player 1 has a winning strategy in this case.

Case 2: Player 2 has a winning strategy in game G’. Then


player 1 should choose Aas his f irst move in game G. This
puts him in the position of the Player 2 in game G’, and so
Player 1 will have a winning strategy in this case as well.

So in any case, we conclude that Player 1 has a winning


strategy —even though we don’t have a clue what it is.

You might also like