Combinatorial Game Theory
who wins, and by how much
Concept

Clobber — where it appears

A game where a stone moves onto an adjacent enemy stone and removes it, so a player can move exactly when the opponent can. Its values are all-small and unreadable, so a bracket between two multiples of up is the practical summary of one.

Named by 16 essays across 6 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

One node per route, one node per position. For each board, the number of nodes in the recursion tree a solver with no memo table would walk, beside the number of distinct positions that tree contains, beside the longest run of moves in it. The first number is the cost of forgetting; the second is the size of the table that avoids it; the third is the stack, and it stays small however the other two grow.

A position reached eleven ways is one position

A 4×4 Domineering board has 5,700 positions in it and 6,257,129 routes through them. Three heaps of 7, 11 and 13 have 480 positions and 7.6 × 10¹⁶ routes. The gap between those two numbers is not an optimisation — it is the difference between a search that finishes and one that does not.

complexity · Search Folding a 4×4 board by its symmetries. The size of a Domineering solver's table when positions related by a board symmetry are stored once. The saving rises toward the size of the symmetry group and stops there — it is a constant factor by construction, and no board is large enough to make it anything else.

What counts as the same position, and what that is worth

Folding a 4×4 Domineering board by its symmetries takes the table from 5,700 entries to 1,522 — a saving of 3.75, against a ceiling of exactly 4. An orbit cannot be larger than the group acting on it, so this is the one saving in the subject that can never change an exponent.

complexity · Identification A winning strategy on 3×3, drawn whole. The whole of one player's winning strategy on a small Domineering board: their own move at each of their turns, and every reply the opponent has at each of theirs. The strategy branches only where the loser chooses. Its size is what somebody would have to be handed to check the claim that this player wins, and it is far larger than the claim itself.

"Left wins" has no short proof

A complete solution of Nim on heaps of 7, 11 and 13 is 480 table entries. A winning strategy for the same position — one move of the winner's at each of their turns, and an answer to every reply — has 56,167,022 nodes in it. The answer is smaller than the proof by a factor of a hundred thousand.

complexity · Complexity Clobber: every value smaller than every number. Blue and red stones on a small board. A move takes one of your own stones onto an orthogonally adjacent enemy stone, which is removed. Because adjacency is symmetric, a player has a move exactly when the opponent does — so no position can ever be worth a whole move to anybody, and every value that comes out is an infinitesimal.

A game where nobody can be ahead in moves

A blue stone beside a red one is a move for both players at once. So neither player can run out while the other still has something to do — and every value the game produces is smaller than every positive number, by the shape of the rule rather than by inspection.

positions · Clobber Clobber: every value smaller than every number. Blue and red stones on a small board. A move takes one of your own stones onto an orthogonally adjacent enemy stone, which is removed. Because adjacency is symmetric, a player has a move exactly when the opponent does — so no position can ever be worth a whole move to anybody, and every value that comes out is an infinitesimal.

The class where nobody runs out first

Three stones in a row — blue, blue, red — and the position is worth exactly up. Clobber cannot produce anything else, because adjacency is symmetric — a player has a move precisely when the opponent does, and a game with that shape can never be worth a whole move to anybody.

values · Infinitesimals Three things the word “solved” is used for. The three standard senses of a solved game, priced on positions this solver can settle completely. Ultra-weak names the winner; weak supplies a strategy from the opening; strong supplies one from every position. They differ by orders of magnitude, and a claim that a game is solved is nearly useless until it says which of the three it means.

Three different claims are all called solved

Hex is solved in the sense that the first player provably wins, by an argument that names no move whatever. Nim is solved in the sense that a formula gives the right move from any position at any size. Between them sit strategies for one opening, and databases of a few billion positions. The word covers all four.

complexity · Complexity The bracket of a sum, against the sum of the brackets. Two all-small positions, the interval of multiples of ↑ each lies between, those two intervals added coordinatewise, and the interval the sum actually lies between. The added one always contains the computed one — greater-than survives addition — so the bracket never widens under a sum. Where it narrows, the parts were each too vague to pin down and the sum is not.

When the ups add

Atomic weight brackets do not add over a sum — they bound it. Over all 120 pairs from a fifteen-game family the sum's bracket came out exactly the sum of the parts' brackets 56 times, strictly narrower 64 times, and wider never; and the rule separating the two is one line long, because every one of the 54 pairs with a pinned part is exact and only 2 of the other 66 are.

sums · Infinitesimals Clobber: every value smaller than every number. Blue and red stones on a small board. A move takes one of your own stones onto an orthogonally adjacent enemy stone, which is removed. Because adjacency is symmetric, a player has a move exactly when the opponent does — so no position can ever be worth a whole move to anybody, and every value that comes out is an infinitesimal.

One row of Clobber

Every string of blue, red and empty squares up to eight long — 9,840 rows — carries one of only 111 values, and every one of them is infinitesimal. A third of the rows are worth exactly zero. Six alternating stones are worth zero and eight are worth a form that takes four lines to print, so the values do not simplify as the row grows: they explode, while the row stays trivial to describe.

positions · Clobber The values the construction hands down, and the values games produce. The two lists counted against each other. The construction produces 1,474 values by day three; the eleven thousand positions swept here produce 1,193, and only 116 of those are on the construction's list. A value's birthday and a value's reachability have nothing to do with each other.

The values nobody's game produces

The construction hands down 1,474 values by day three. Seventeen rulesets on this site, swept to eleven thousand positions, produce 1,193 — and only 116 of those are on the construction's list. Two of the twenty-two values born by day two are produced by no position of any game here, and 1,077 of the values that are produced are born later than day three. A value's birthday and a value's reachability have almost nothing to do with each other.

values · Realisability What an approximation is worth. Every pair of Clobber rows up to six squares, judged twice: by their up-brackets and by the comparison itself. The bracket is never wrong where it speaks, and most of what it declines to answer has no answer.

When the bracket decides

A Clobber row's value is an all-small game nobody can hold in their head, so the practical answer is the up-bracket: a pair of integers between which its atomic weight must lie. As an approximation it is worth exactly what it settles — 1,585 of 7,875 pairs of rows are ordered by it, every one of those orders is right, and of the 6,290 it declines, 4,222 have no answer either.

positions · Clobber Where running out of moves is permanent. Eleven rulesets, each walked position by position from three small boards, with every position at which a player has no move examined for whether any continuation gives them one back. Nothing here is evaluated: dead-ending is a property of the rules, and two boards worth the same value can differ on it. 9 of the 11 are dead-ending and 2 are not.

Nobody comes back

There is a class of games in which running out of moves is permanent, and it is the setting almost every modern misère result is stated in. Nine of this site's eleven rulesets belong to it across 5,334 positions; the two that do not are Toads and Frogs and Amazons, and Toads and Frogs loses the property to a single clause — delete the hop and it joins the list.

limits · Dead-ending 7 symmetries, and the one that is a strategy. 4 games and 7 candidate symmetries, each tested by playing the strategy out against every opponent line rather than by argument. A pairing strategy needs a map that fixes the start, is an involution, and carries one player's moves to the other's — and the last condition is where most of these fail.

The strategy that is a symmetry

A pairing strategy is a symmetry of the board that turns one player's moves into the other's, and it wins without computing anything. Tested by playing it out rather than argued, it wins one of seven candidate symmetries across four games — exactly the Cram boards with both sides even, which is exactly where no domino is its own image.

impartial · Pairing Two orders of magnitude. The share of positions of a size whose value is one no smaller position exhibits. Every Hackenbush string is a new value and fewer than one Clobber row in a hundred is.

The rate was the alphabet

The rung below asked for a quantity a size cap cannot censor and proposed the rate: how many new values a ruleset produces per extra square. The rate is honest and it measures the notation — every ruleset grows at close to the number of symbols its positions are written in, and the seven span less than a factor of two. What separates them is the yield, which spans a hundred and nineteen.

values · Realisability Same group, three different yields. The rulesets with a trivial symmetry group, which the conjecture predicts must all have a yield of one.

Three groups, and three yields

The conjecture was that each ruleset's yield tends to the reciprocal of its symmetry group's order. Three rulesets have a trivial group and predicted yields of one; they measure 1.000, 0.531 and 0.204. And every colliding value in Push and Shove — all 175 of them — has two rows no symmetry relates.

values · Realisability How many turns are choices. Every position of each game with both sides to move, classified by whether the turn is a choice at all: no move, exactly one move, several moves that all lead to the same verdict, and several that do not. Only the last is a turn at which the alternation is doing any work.

Eleven moves and one decision

A prefix has one quantifier a turn, so a game of eleven moves is eleven alternations. Counted on the boards themselves, a Toads and Frogs strip of eleven moves has twenty-six turns with exactly one move available and one turn anywhere at which the choice changes the answer; a Clobber board has a hundred and fourteen turns and none. Nim, the game everybody calls solved, decides at four turns in five.

complexity · Alternation What the opponent's choosing is worth. Every position answered twice: against an opponent who searches, and against one following a fixed rule with no search in it. Only a loss can change, so the share is taken over the losses. The spread between games is the measurement — in one of them nearly every loss is recovered and in another none is.

The opponent stops choosing

Replace one player by a rule with no search in it and the question has one chooser left, which is a puzzle rather than a game. Nim recovers five of its six lost positions that way, and six of seven on three heaps of five. Domineering recovers six of a hundred and twenty-two while the fixed rule throws away a winning move eighty-eight times, and one Clobber board recovers none at all — because on that board no rule can misplay.

complexity · Alternation

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Exhaustive searchDomineeringCanonical formToads and FrogsComplexityStar (∗)All-smallAtomic weightInfinitesimalNimComparisonHackenbush

All concepts