Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    In games where A wins if and only if E does not win, the ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The negation of the statement that player A has a winning strategy is equivalent to player E having a winning strategy

    In games where A wins if and only if E does not win, the winning conditions are mutually exclusive and exhaustive

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Modality & Possibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Logical laws governing reasoning with game-theoretic formulas have game-theoreti...The negation of the statement that player A has a winning strategy is equivalent...

    Similar

    Player ∃ has a winning strategy in G(¬φ) if and only if player ∃ does ...77%Player ∃ has a winning strategy for Hintikka's game G(φ) if and only i...76%Pure Coordination games may have multiple equilibria.76%There exist games in which a pure strategy is strictly or weakly domin...75%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: logics-for-games
    View source passageHide passage
    Thus, logical laws governing reasoning with such formulas acquire game-theoretic content. For instance, the negation of the statement that one player, A, has a winning strategy is provably equivalent to saying that the other player, E, has a winning strategy, at least in those cases where A wins if and only if E does not:

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective