Can you open the door or die? v2Can you open the door or die?A game of Green JackSearching for a secret doorHow many doors are there?The Monty Hall ArenaCan you open the bathroom door?99 chips into more chips99 chips into more chips V233 stones into gold transmuterWhat is the optimal strategy for this triangular board game?Can you open the door or die?
"Correct me if I'm wrong"
What are the current battlegrounds for people’s “rights” in the UK?
Is there any proof that high saturation and contrast makes a picture more appealing in social media?
Dates on degrees don’t make sense – will people care?
Very tricky nonogram - where to go next?
In Mistborn, why can metal in people's bodies be affected by Allomancy sometimes?
What are Elsa's reasons for selecting the Holy Grail on behalf of Donovan?
Too early in the morning to have SODA?
Find All Possible Unique Combinations of Letters in a Word
How long did the SR-71 take to get to cruising altitude?
Extending prime numbers digit by digit while retaining primality
"What is the maximum that Player 1 can win?"
Explicit song lyrics checker
Non-misogynistic way to say “asshole”?
Mathematically modelling RC circuit with a linear input
Can I enter the UK for 24 hours from a Schengen area, holding an Indian passport?
Justifying Affordable Bespoke Spaceships
In the US, can a former president run again?
When Bnei Yisroel travelled in the midbar, what happened on Shabbos?
Am I legally required to provide a (GPL licensed) source code even after a project is abandoned?
What happened to Hopper's girlfriend in season one?
I just entered the USA without passport control at Atlanta airport
Warnings using NDSolve on wave PDE. "Using maximum number of grid points" , "Warning: scaled local spatial error estimate"
How did Gollum enter Moria?
Can you open the door or die? v2
Can you open the door or die?A game of Green JackSearching for a secret doorHow many doors are there?The Monty Hall ArenaCan you open the bathroom door?99 chips into more chips99 chips into more chips V233 stones into gold transmuterWhat is the optimal strategy for this triangular board game?Can you open the door or die?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
This is the follow up question to my previous question
You wake up and find yourself in a very strange room with a single
door. You find a note on the ground surrounded by lots of cards:
There are 66 green and 66 blue door cards on the ground. If you put one blue and one green card into the slots next to the door, the door
will open. If you insert two cards of the same color, you will lose a
life! I won't tell you how many lives you have, but you will die if
you lose all of them!
For most people, this could be completed easily. Unfortunately, you
cannot distinguish the color of the cards because you are fully
colorblind! Whoever put you there probably knows this. They
undoubtedly gave you just enough lives for you to be certain you can
get out - if you play their game optimally.
This time you need to put two green cards into the slot to open the door instead of one green and one blue.
so
How many tries do you need to guarantee you open the door?
logical-deduction strategy
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is the follow up question to my previous question
You wake up and find yourself in a very strange room with a single
door. You find a note on the ground surrounded by lots of cards:
There are 66 green and 66 blue door cards on the ground. If you put one blue and one green card into the slots next to the door, the door
will open. If you insert two cards of the same color, you will lose a
life! I won't tell you how many lives you have, but you will die if
you lose all of them!
For most people, this could be completed easily. Unfortunately, you
cannot distinguish the color of the cards because you are fully
colorblind! Whoever put you there probably knows this. They
undoubtedly gave you just enough lives for you to be certain you can
get out - if you play their game optimally.
This time you need to put two green cards into the slot to open the door instead of one green and one blue.
so
How many tries do you need to guarantee you open the door?
logical-deduction strategy
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I assume we get the cards back if we fail, right?
$endgroup$
– Moacir
Jun 12 at 13:51
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is the follow up question to my previous question
You wake up and find yourself in a very strange room with a single
door. You find a note on the ground surrounded by lots of cards:
There are 66 green and 66 blue door cards on the ground. If you put one blue and one green card into the slots next to the door, the door
will open. If you insert two cards of the same color, you will lose a
life! I won't tell you how many lives you have, but you will die if
you lose all of them!
For most people, this could be completed easily. Unfortunately, you
cannot distinguish the color of the cards because you are fully
colorblind! Whoever put you there probably knows this. They
undoubtedly gave you just enough lives for you to be certain you can
get out - if you play their game optimally.
This time you need to put two green cards into the slot to open the door instead of one green and one blue.
so
How many tries do you need to guarantee you open the door?
logical-deduction strategy
$endgroup$
This is the follow up question to my previous question
You wake up and find yourself in a very strange room with a single
door. You find a note on the ground surrounded by lots of cards:
There are 66 green and 66 blue door cards on the ground. If you put one blue and one green card into the slots next to the door, the door
will open. If you insert two cards of the same color, you will lose a
life! I won't tell you how many lives you have, but you will die if
you lose all of them!
For most people, this could be completed easily. Unfortunately, you
cannot distinguish the color of the cards because you are fully
colorblind! Whoever put you there probably knows this. They
undoubtedly gave you just enough lives for you to be certain you can
get out - if you play their game optimally.
This time you need to put two green cards into the slot to open the door instead of one green and one blue.
so
How many tries do you need to guarantee you open the door?
logical-deduction strategy
logical-deduction strategy
edited Jun 11 at 11:46
Evargalo
3,31511026
3,31511026
asked Jun 11 at 9:51
OrayOray
16.9k439171
16.9k439171
$begingroup$
I assume we get the cards back if we fail, right?
$endgroup$
– Moacir
Jun 12 at 13:51
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I assume we get the cards back if we fail, right?
$endgroup$
– Moacir
Jun 12 at 13:51
$begingroup$
I assume we get the cards back if we fail, right?
$endgroup$
– Moacir
Jun 12 at 13:51
$begingroup$
I assume we get the cards back if we fail, right?
$endgroup$
– Moacir
Jun 12 at 13:51
add a comment |
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It can be done in
69 attempts at most (slight optimisation of athin's answer, but probably still not optimal)
Solution
First, number all the cards 1 to 132. Then compare 1-2, 3-4, etc. up to 125-126 (63 attempts in total). If none of them worked, each of the 63 tested pairs should contain at least 1 blue, so there are at least 63 blues in cards 1-126. That means that the remaining cards 127-132 should contain at most 3 blues and at least 3 greens.
Now, split the remaining 6 cards into 2 groups 127,128,129 and 130,131,132. At least one of the groups should contain 2 greens (since there are at least 3 greens in 127-132). Now, just test all combinations inside the groups (127-128, 127-129, 128-129, 130-131, 130-132 and 131-132 - 6 attempts in total). At least one of them should work, since one of the group contains at least 2 greens.
Grand total: 63+6=69 attempts
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
well done, this is a bit more complicated answer than mine but it seems right to me :)
$endgroup$
– Oray
Jun 11 at 10:58
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Also not sure whether this is optimal but I can do this in
$70$ tries.
First,
Make $66$ pairs from all cards and put each pair one by one.
In the worst case,
All pairs are not two greens. The only possible thing is that each pair is green-blue.
Finally,
Pick any two pairs. Try all $4$ possibilities by taking one card from the first pair and one from another pair. Therefore we need $66 + 4 = 70$ tries.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
this is not optimal, but upvoted.
$endgroup$
– Oray
Jun 11 at 10:34
2
$begingroup$
You don't need +4 since you already tried one of the combos in the first round. Therefore 69 maximum tries.
$endgroup$
– Paul Evans
Jun 12 at 14:56
1
$begingroup$
@PaulEvans we still need +4 as actually there are 6 combinations and 2 are already tried, cmiiw.
$endgroup$
– athin
Jun 12 at 15:43
1
$begingroup$
Two of those combinations are right, since you have green + blue combinations, so 3 is enough, 66+(4<wrong combinations>-2<already tested>+1<right answer>)=69
$endgroup$
– Montolide
Jun 12 at 19:32
2
$begingroup$
@Montolide Whoopsie, we need green-green to solve this puzzle instead of blue-green
$endgroup$
– athin
Jun 12 at 21:53
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
I can prove a lower bound of
$69$ tries.
The first step is to notice that the question is equivalent to
finding an $132$-node graph $G$ with no independent set of size $ge 66$.
The reason is:
1. If we have the graph $G$, then for each edge $(x,y)$ in $G$, we put the $x$-th and $y$-th card into the slot. If we failed then no edge has two green cards as its endpoint, so $66$ green cards induce an independent set of $G$.
and
2. If we have a strategy to win the game, then the strategy must be nonadaptive, since we don't gain any information from each failure to choose two green cards. That is, the strategy of each step is already determined before the game gets played. If the $i$-th step is to test card $a_i$ and card $b_i$, we insert edge $(a_i,b_i)$ into $G$. If $G$ has a size-$66$ independent set, our strategy would be invalid when this set of cards are green.
Then we observe
$G$ must contain an odd cycle. Because otherwise $G$ is a bipartite graph which always have an independent set of size $ge frac1322=66$.
and
If $G$ has $C$ connected components, then $G$ has at least $133-C$ edges. For an arbitrary graph $G'$, if it has $C'$ components and $V'$ vertices, then it has at least $V'-C'$ edges, so we infer that $G$ has at least $132-C$ edges. However as we demonstrated above, $G$ has a cycle, and deleting an edge from that cycle doesn't change the number of its components. So we conclude $G$ has $ge (132-C)+1$ edges.
So there are a few cases. If
$Cge 66$, then we can take any vertex from a component to form an independent set of size $C$. This is invalid;
If
$Cle 64$, then $G$ has $ge 133-64=69$ edges;
If
$C=65$, then every component must be a clique: if some component is not a clique, we can take two vertices from it and one vertex from every other component and still form an independent set (of size $C+1$). Now let $a_1,a_2,dots,a_65$ be the number of vertices in each component, then $sum_i=1^65a_i=132$ and the number of edges is $E=sum_i=1^65fraca_i(a_i-1)2$. Even if we allow $a_i$'s be real numbers (instead of integers), the minimum of $E$ is reached when each $a_i=a=132/65$, and $E=65cdot fraca(a-1)2approx 68.03$. Therefore $69$ edges are needed in this case. (We note that this corresponds to @trolley813's answer, and optimal integer solution is that each $a_i$ is $2$ except two of them are $3$.)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A completely sideways answer - but possibly only one try...
Here you need to cheat a little, and cause yourself some sort of injury to get some blood - smear some of that blood on one card, and then another - keep doing this until you find two that have different shades.
(see other answers for how many of them you may need to check, however if you keep one card and swap the other every time then that's 66 tries - every single card of one colour, and a single card of the other).
The red "filter" cannot restore invisible (to you) colour, but it can hide some of the colour that's already there, so allowing you to see a difference in shade between the two different coloured cards.
Of course, the fiendish person setting this trap may have already thought of this and ensured they used specific pigments that don't work with this filtering - but they might not want to reuse this trap if they come in and find it looks like a scene from a horror movie...
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Not sure if this is optimal, but:
Take a set of 3 cards. Try the 3 combinations of pairs of cards (3 tries). If they all fail, at least 2 cards must be blue. Discard all 3.
Then worst case, after
33 sets of 3, you've discarded all the blue cards
So you're guaranteed to find two green on your
100th attempt
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
Then it doesn't work!! Thanks for pointing pointing that out
$endgroup$
– Mohirl
Jun 11 at 10:11
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The lower bound should be
This solution was for v1 problem. I wrote this one by mistake. Ill try the v2 problem.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You can delete and undelete your answer whenever you like. Probably best to in order to avoid downvotes.
$endgroup$
– wizzwizz4
Jun 13 at 13:40
add a comment |
protected by Community♦ Jun 12 at 8:47
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It can be done in
69 attempts at most (slight optimisation of athin's answer, but probably still not optimal)
Solution
First, number all the cards 1 to 132. Then compare 1-2, 3-4, etc. up to 125-126 (63 attempts in total). If none of them worked, each of the 63 tested pairs should contain at least 1 blue, so there are at least 63 blues in cards 1-126. That means that the remaining cards 127-132 should contain at most 3 blues and at least 3 greens.
Now, split the remaining 6 cards into 2 groups 127,128,129 and 130,131,132. At least one of the groups should contain 2 greens (since there are at least 3 greens in 127-132). Now, just test all combinations inside the groups (127-128, 127-129, 128-129, 130-131, 130-132 and 131-132 - 6 attempts in total). At least one of them should work, since one of the group contains at least 2 greens.
Grand total: 63+6=69 attempts
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
well done, this is a bit more complicated answer than mine but it seems right to me :)
$endgroup$
– Oray
Jun 11 at 10:58
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It can be done in
69 attempts at most (slight optimisation of athin's answer, but probably still not optimal)
Solution
First, number all the cards 1 to 132. Then compare 1-2, 3-4, etc. up to 125-126 (63 attempts in total). If none of them worked, each of the 63 tested pairs should contain at least 1 blue, so there are at least 63 blues in cards 1-126. That means that the remaining cards 127-132 should contain at most 3 blues and at least 3 greens.
Now, split the remaining 6 cards into 2 groups 127,128,129 and 130,131,132. At least one of the groups should contain 2 greens (since there are at least 3 greens in 127-132). Now, just test all combinations inside the groups (127-128, 127-129, 128-129, 130-131, 130-132 and 131-132 - 6 attempts in total). At least one of them should work, since one of the group contains at least 2 greens.
Grand total: 63+6=69 attempts
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
well done, this is a bit more complicated answer than mine but it seems right to me :)
$endgroup$
– Oray
Jun 11 at 10:58
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It can be done in
69 attempts at most (slight optimisation of athin's answer, but probably still not optimal)
Solution
First, number all the cards 1 to 132. Then compare 1-2, 3-4, etc. up to 125-126 (63 attempts in total). If none of them worked, each of the 63 tested pairs should contain at least 1 blue, so there are at least 63 blues in cards 1-126. That means that the remaining cards 127-132 should contain at most 3 blues and at least 3 greens.
Now, split the remaining 6 cards into 2 groups 127,128,129 and 130,131,132. At least one of the groups should contain 2 greens (since there are at least 3 greens in 127-132). Now, just test all combinations inside the groups (127-128, 127-129, 128-129, 130-131, 130-132 and 131-132 - 6 attempts in total). At least one of them should work, since one of the group contains at least 2 greens.
Grand total: 63+6=69 attempts
$endgroup$
It can be done in
69 attempts at most (slight optimisation of athin's answer, but probably still not optimal)
Solution
First, number all the cards 1 to 132. Then compare 1-2, 3-4, etc. up to 125-126 (63 attempts in total). If none of them worked, each of the 63 tested pairs should contain at least 1 blue, so there are at least 63 blues in cards 1-126. That means that the remaining cards 127-132 should contain at most 3 blues and at least 3 greens.
Now, split the remaining 6 cards into 2 groups 127,128,129 and 130,131,132. At least one of the groups should contain 2 greens (since there are at least 3 greens in 127-132). Now, just test all combinations inside the groups (127-128, 127-129, 128-129, 130-131, 130-132 and 131-132 - 6 attempts in total). At least one of them should work, since one of the group contains at least 2 greens.
Grand total: 63+6=69 attempts
answered Jun 11 at 10:44
trolley813trolley813
2,067515
2,067515
2
$begingroup$
well done, this is a bit more complicated answer than mine but it seems right to me :)
$endgroup$
– Oray
Jun 11 at 10:58
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
well done, this is a bit more complicated answer than mine but it seems right to me :)
$endgroup$
– Oray
Jun 11 at 10:58
2
2
$begingroup$
well done, this is a bit more complicated answer than mine but it seems right to me :)
$endgroup$
– Oray
Jun 11 at 10:58
$begingroup$
well done, this is a bit more complicated answer than mine but it seems right to me :)
$endgroup$
– Oray
Jun 11 at 10:58
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Also not sure whether this is optimal but I can do this in
$70$ tries.
First,
Make $66$ pairs from all cards and put each pair one by one.
In the worst case,
All pairs are not two greens. The only possible thing is that each pair is green-blue.
Finally,
Pick any two pairs. Try all $4$ possibilities by taking one card from the first pair and one from another pair. Therefore we need $66 + 4 = 70$ tries.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
this is not optimal, but upvoted.
$endgroup$
– Oray
Jun 11 at 10:34
2
$begingroup$
You don't need +4 since you already tried one of the combos in the first round. Therefore 69 maximum tries.
$endgroup$
– Paul Evans
Jun 12 at 14:56
1
$begingroup$
@PaulEvans we still need +4 as actually there are 6 combinations and 2 are already tried, cmiiw.
$endgroup$
– athin
Jun 12 at 15:43
1
$begingroup$
Two of those combinations are right, since you have green + blue combinations, so 3 is enough, 66+(4<wrong combinations>-2<already tested>+1<right answer>)=69
$endgroup$
– Montolide
Jun 12 at 19:32
2
$begingroup$
@Montolide Whoopsie, we need green-green to solve this puzzle instead of blue-green
$endgroup$
– athin
Jun 12 at 21:53
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Also not sure whether this is optimal but I can do this in
$70$ tries.
First,
Make $66$ pairs from all cards and put each pair one by one.
In the worst case,
All pairs are not two greens. The only possible thing is that each pair is green-blue.
Finally,
Pick any two pairs. Try all $4$ possibilities by taking one card from the first pair and one from another pair. Therefore we need $66 + 4 = 70$ tries.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
this is not optimal, but upvoted.
$endgroup$
– Oray
Jun 11 at 10:34
2
$begingroup$
You don't need +4 since you already tried one of the combos in the first round. Therefore 69 maximum tries.
$endgroup$
– Paul Evans
Jun 12 at 14:56
1
$begingroup$
@PaulEvans we still need +4 as actually there are 6 combinations and 2 are already tried, cmiiw.
$endgroup$
– athin
Jun 12 at 15:43
1
$begingroup$
Two of those combinations are right, since you have green + blue combinations, so 3 is enough, 66+(4<wrong combinations>-2<already tested>+1<right answer>)=69
$endgroup$
– Montolide
Jun 12 at 19:32
2
$begingroup$
@Montolide Whoopsie, we need green-green to solve this puzzle instead of blue-green
$endgroup$
– athin
Jun 12 at 21:53
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Also not sure whether this is optimal but I can do this in
$70$ tries.
First,
Make $66$ pairs from all cards and put each pair one by one.
In the worst case,
All pairs are not two greens. The only possible thing is that each pair is green-blue.
Finally,
Pick any two pairs. Try all $4$ possibilities by taking one card from the first pair and one from another pair. Therefore we need $66 + 4 = 70$ tries.
$endgroup$
Also not sure whether this is optimal but I can do this in
$70$ tries.
First,
Make $66$ pairs from all cards and put each pair one by one.
In the worst case,
All pairs are not two greens. The only possible thing is that each pair is green-blue.
Finally,
Pick any two pairs. Try all $4$ possibilities by taking one card from the first pair and one from another pair. Therefore we need $66 + 4 = 70$ tries.
answered Jun 11 at 10:18
athinathin
11.4k23896
11.4k23896
$begingroup$
this is not optimal, but upvoted.
$endgroup$
– Oray
Jun 11 at 10:34
2
$begingroup$
You don't need +4 since you already tried one of the combos in the first round. Therefore 69 maximum tries.
$endgroup$
– Paul Evans
Jun 12 at 14:56
1
$begingroup$
@PaulEvans we still need +4 as actually there are 6 combinations and 2 are already tried, cmiiw.
$endgroup$
– athin
Jun 12 at 15:43
1
$begingroup$
Two of those combinations are right, since you have green + blue combinations, so 3 is enough, 66+(4<wrong combinations>-2<already tested>+1<right answer>)=69
$endgroup$
– Montolide
Jun 12 at 19:32
2
$begingroup$
@Montolide Whoopsie, we need green-green to solve this puzzle instead of blue-green
$endgroup$
– athin
Jun 12 at 21:53
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
this is not optimal, but upvoted.
$endgroup$
– Oray
Jun 11 at 10:34
2
$begingroup$
You don't need +4 since you already tried one of the combos in the first round. Therefore 69 maximum tries.
$endgroup$
– Paul Evans
Jun 12 at 14:56
1
$begingroup$
@PaulEvans we still need +4 as actually there are 6 combinations and 2 are already tried, cmiiw.
$endgroup$
– athin
Jun 12 at 15:43
1
$begingroup$
Two of those combinations are right, since you have green + blue combinations, so 3 is enough, 66+(4<wrong combinations>-2<already tested>+1<right answer>)=69
$endgroup$
– Montolide
Jun 12 at 19:32
2
$begingroup$
@Montolide Whoopsie, we need green-green to solve this puzzle instead of blue-green
$endgroup$
– athin
Jun 12 at 21:53
$begingroup$
this is not optimal, but upvoted.
$endgroup$
– Oray
Jun 11 at 10:34
$begingroup$
this is not optimal, but upvoted.
$endgroup$
– Oray
Jun 11 at 10:34
2
2
$begingroup$
You don't need +4 since you already tried one of the combos in the first round. Therefore 69 maximum tries.
$endgroup$
– Paul Evans
Jun 12 at 14:56
$begingroup$
You don't need +4 since you already tried one of the combos in the first round. Therefore 69 maximum tries.
$endgroup$
– Paul Evans
Jun 12 at 14:56
1
1
$begingroup$
@PaulEvans we still need +4 as actually there are 6 combinations and 2 are already tried, cmiiw.
$endgroup$
– athin
Jun 12 at 15:43
$begingroup$
@PaulEvans we still need +4 as actually there are 6 combinations and 2 are already tried, cmiiw.
$endgroup$
– athin
Jun 12 at 15:43
1
1
$begingroup$
Two of those combinations are right, since you have green + blue combinations, so 3 is enough, 66+(4<wrong combinations>-2<already tested>+1<right answer>)=69
$endgroup$
– Montolide
Jun 12 at 19:32
$begingroup$
Two of those combinations are right, since you have green + blue combinations, so 3 is enough, 66+(4<wrong combinations>-2<already tested>+1<right answer>)=69
$endgroup$
– Montolide
Jun 12 at 19:32
2
2
$begingroup$
@Montolide Whoopsie, we need green-green to solve this puzzle instead of blue-green
$endgroup$
– athin
Jun 12 at 21:53
$begingroup$
@Montolide Whoopsie, we need green-green to solve this puzzle instead of blue-green
$endgroup$
– athin
Jun 12 at 21:53
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
I can prove a lower bound of
$69$ tries.
The first step is to notice that the question is equivalent to
finding an $132$-node graph $G$ with no independent set of size $ge 66$.
The reason is:
1. If we have the graph $G$, then for each edge $(x,y)$ in $G$, we put the $x$-th and $y$-th card into the slot. If we failed then no edge has two green cards as its endpoint, so $66$ green cards induce an independent set of $G$.
and
2. If we have a strategy to win the game, then the strategy must be nonadaptive, since we don't gain any information from each failure to choose two green cards. That is, the strategy of each step is already determined before the game gets played. If the $i$-th step is to test card $a_i$ and card $b_i$, we insert edge $(a_i,b_i)$ into $G$. If $G$ has a size-$66$ independent set, our strategy would be invalid when this set of cards are green.
Then we observe
$G$ must contain an odd cycle. Because otherwise $G$ is a bipartite graph which always have an independent set of size $ge frac1322=66$.
and
If $G$ has $C$ connected components, then $G$ has at least $133-C$ edges. For an arbitrary graph $G'$, if it has $C'$ components and $V'$ vertices, then it has at least $V'-C'$ edges, so we infer that $G$ has at least $132-C$ edges. However as we demonstrated above, $G$ has a cycle, and deleting an edge from that cycle doesn't change the number of its components. So we conclude $G$ has $ge (132-C)+1$ edges.
So there are a few cases. If
$Cge 66$, then we can take any vertex from a component to form an independent set of size $C$. This is invalid;
If
$Cle 64$, then $G$ has $ge 133-64=69$ edges;
If
$C=65$, then every component must be a clique: if some component is not a clique, we can take two vertices from it and one vertex from every other component and still form an independent set (of size $C+1$). Now let $a_1,a_2,dots,a_65$ be the number of vertices in each component, then $sum_i=1^65a_i=132$ and the number of edges is $E=sum_i=1^65fraca_i(a_i-1)2$. Even if we allow $a_i$'s be real numbers (instead of integers), the minimum of $E$ is reached when each $a_i=a=132/65$, and $E=65cdot fraca(a-1)2approx 68.03$. Therefore $69$ edges are needed in this case. (We note that this corresponds to @trolley813's answer, and optimal integer solution is that each $a_i$ is $2$ except two of them are $3$.)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I can prove a lower bound of
$69$ tries.
The first step is to notice that the question is equivalent to
finding an $132$-node graph $G$ with no independent set of size $ge 66$.
The reason is:
1. If we have the graph $G$, then for each edge $(x,y)$ in $G$, we put the $x$-th and $y$-th card into the slot. If we failed then no edge has two green cards as its endpoint, so $66$ green cards induce an independent set of $G$.
and
2. If we have a strategy to win the game, then the strategy must be nonadaptive, since we don't gain any information from each failure to choose two green cards. That is, the strategy of each step is already determined before the game gets played. If the $i$-th step is to test card $a_i$ and card $b_i$, we insert edge $(a_i,b_i)$ into $G$. If $G$ has a size-$66$ independent set, our strategy would be invalid when this set of cards are green.
Then we observe
$G$ must contain an odd cycle. Because otherwise $G$ is a bipartite graph which always have an independent set of size $ge frac1322=66$.
and
If $G$ has $C$ connected components, then $G$ has at least $133-C$ edges. For an arbitrary graph $G'$, if it has $C'$ components and $V'$ vertices, then it has at least $V'-C'$ edges, so we infer that $G$ has at least $132-C$ edges. However as we demonstrated above, $G$ has a cycle, and deleting an edge from that cycle doesn't change the number of its components. So we conclude $G$ has $ge (132-C)+1$ edges.
So there are a few cases. If
$Cge 66$, then we can take any vertex from a component to form an independent set of size $C$. This is invalid;
If
$Cle 64$, then $G$ has $ge 133-64=69$ edges;
If
$C=65$, then every component must be a clique: if some component is not a clique, we can take two vertices from it and one vertex from every other component and still form an independent set (of size $C+1$). Now let $a_1,a_2,dots,a_65$ be the number of vertices in each component, then $sum_i=1^65a_i=132$ and the number of edges is $E=sum_i=1^65fraca_i(a_i-1)2$. Even if we allow $a_i$'s be real numbers (instead of integers), the minimum of $E$ is reached when each $a_i=a=132/65$, and $E=65cdot fraca(a-1)2approx 68.03$. Therefore $69$ edges are needed in this case. (We note that this corresponds to @trolley813's answer, and optimal integer solution is that each $a_i$ is $2$ except two of them are $3$.)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I can prove a lower bound of
$69$ tries.
The first step is to notice that the question is equivalent to
finding an $132$-node graph $G$ with no independent set of size $ge 66$.
The reason is:
1. If we have the graph $G$, then for each edge $(x,y)$ in $G$, we put the $x$-th and $y$-th card into the slot. If we failed then no edge has two green cards as its endpoint, so $66$ green cards induce an independent set of $G$.
and
2. If we have a strategy to win the game, then the strategy must be nonadaptive, since we don't gain any information from each failure to choose two green cards. That is, the strategy of each step is already determined before the game gets played. If the $i$-th step is to test card $a_i$ and card $b_i$, we insert edge $(a_i,b_i)$ into $G$. If $G$ has a size-$66$ independent set, our strategy would be invalid when this set of cards are green.
Then we observe
$G$ must contain an odd cycle. Because otherwise $G$ is a bipartite graph which always have an independent set of size $ge frac1322=66$.
and
If $G$ has $C$ connected components, then $G$ has at least $133-C$ edges. For an arbitrary graph $G'$, if it has $C'$ components and $V'$ vertices, then it has at least $V'-C'$ edges, so we infer that $G$ has at least $132-C$ edges. However as we demonstrated above, $G$ has a cycle, and deleting an edge from that cycle doesn't change the number of its components. So we conclude $G$ has $ge (132-C)+1$ edges.
So there are a few cases. If
$Cge 66$, then we can take any vertex from a component to form an independent set of size $C$. This is invalid;
If
$Cle 64$, then $G$ has $ge 133-64=69$ edges;
If
$C=65$, then every component must be a clique: if some component is not a clique, we can take two vertices from it and one vertex from every other component and still form an independent set (of size $C+1$). Now let $a_1,a_2,dots,a_65$ be the number of vertices in each component, then $sum_i=1^65a_i=132$ and the number of edges is $E=sum_i=1^65fraca_i(a_i-1)2$. Even if we allow $a_i$'s be real numbers (instead of integers), the minimum of $E$ is reached when each $a_i=a=132/65$, and $E=65cdot fraca(a-1)2approx 68.03$. Therefore $69$ edges are needed in this case. (We note that this corresponds to @trolley813's answer, and optimal integer solution is that each $a_i$ is $2$ except two of them are $3$.)
$endgroup$
I can prove a lower bound of
$69$ tries.
The first step is to notice that the question is equivalent to
finding an $132$-node graph $G$ with no independent set of size $ge 66$.
The reason is:
1. If we have the graph $G$, then for each edge $(x,y)$ in $G$, we put the $x$-th and $y$-th card into the slot. If we failed then no edge has two green cards as its endpoint, so $66$ green cards induce an independent set of $G$.
and
2. If we have a strategy to win the game, then the strategy must be nonadaptive, since we don't gain any information from each failure to choose two green cards. That is, the strategy of each step is already determined before the game gets played. If the $i$-th step is to test card $a_i$ and card $b_i$, we insert edge $(a_i,b_i)$ into $G$. If $G$ has a size-$66$ independent set, our strategy would be invalid when this set of cards are green.
Then we observe
$G$ must contain an odd cycle. Because otherwise $G$ is a bipartite graph which always have an independent set of size $ge frac1322=66$.
and
If $G$ has $C$ connected components, then $G$ has at least $133-C$ edges. For an arbitrary graph $G'$, if it has $C'$ components and $V'$ vertices, then it has at least $V'-C'$ edges, so we infer that $G$ has at least $132-C$ edges. However as we demonstrated above, $G$ has a cycle, and deleting an edge from that cycle doesn't change the number of its components. So we conclude $G$ has $ge (132-C)+1$ edges.
So there are a few cases. If
$Cge 66$, then we can take any vertex from a component to form an independent set of size $C$. This is invalid;
If
$Cle 64$, then $G$ has $ge 133-64=69$ edges;
If
$C=65$, then every component must be a clique: if some component is not a clique, we can take two vertices from it and one vertex from every other component and still form an independent set (of size $C+1$). Now let $a_1,a_2,dots,a_65$ be the number of vertices in each component, then $sum_i=1^65a_i=132$ and the number of edges is $E=sum_i=1^65fraca_i(a_i-1)2$. Even if we allow $a_i$'s be real numbers (instead of integers), the minimum of $E$ is reached when each $a_i=a=132/65$, and $E=65cdot fraca(a-1)2approx 68.03$. Therefore $69$ edges are needed in this case. (We note that this corresponds to @trolley813's answer, and optimal integer solution is that each $a_i$ is $2$ except two of them are $3$.)
edited Jun 12 at 7:48
answered Jun 12 at 5:54
r_64r_64
3364
3364
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A completely sideways answer - but possibly only one try...
Here you need to cheat a little, and cause yourself some sort of injury to get some blood - smear some of that blood on one card, and then another - keep doing this until you find two that have different shades.
(see other answers for how many of them you may need to check, however if you keep one card and swap the other every time then that's 66 tries - every single card of one colour, and a single card of the other).
The red "filter" cannot restore invisible (to you) colour, but it can hide some of the colour that's already there, so allowing you to see a difference in shade between the two different coloured cards.
Of course, the fiendish person setting this trap may have already thought of this and ensured they used specific pigments that don't work with this filtering - but they might not want to reuse this trap if they come in and find it looks like a scene from a horror movie...
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A completely sideways answer - but possibly only one try...
Here you need to cheat a little, and cause yourself some sort of injury to get some blood - smear some of that blood on one card, and then another - keep doing this until you find two that have different shades.
(see other answers for how many of them you may need to check, however if you keep one card and swap the other every time then that's 66 tries - every single card of one colour, and a single card of the other).
The red "filter" cannot restore invisible (to you) colour, but it can hide some of the colour that's already there, so allowing you to see a difference in shade between the two different coloured cards.
Of course, the fiendish person setting this trap may have already thought of this and ensured they used specific pigments that don't work with this filtering - but they might not want to reuse this trap if they come in and find it looks like a scene from a horror movie...
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A completely sideways answer - but possibly only one try...
Here you need to cheat a little, and cause yourself some sort of injury to get some blood - smear some of that blood on one card, and then another - keep doing this until you find two that have different shades.
(see other answers for how many of them you may need to check, however if you keep one card and swap the other every time then that's 66 tries - every single card of one colour, and a single card of the other).
The red "filter" cannot restore invisible (to you) colour, but it can hide some of the colour that's already there, so allowing you to see a difference in shade between the two different coloured cards.
Of course, the fiendish person setting this trap may have already thought of this and ensured they used specific pigments that don't work with this filtering - but they might not want to reuse this trap if they come in and find it looks like a scene from a horror movie...
$endgroup$
A completely sideways answer - but possibly only one try...
Here you need to cheat a little, and cause yourself some sort of injury to get some blood - smear some of that blood on one card, and then another - keep doing this until you find two that have different shades.
(see other answers for how many of them you may need to check, however if you keep one card and swap the other every time then that's 66 tries - every single card of one colour, and a single card of the other).
The red "filter" cannot restore invisible (to you) colour, but it can hide some of the colour that's already there, so allowing you to see a difference in shade between the two different coloured cards.
Of course, the fiendish person setting this trap may have already thought of this and ensured they used specific pigments that don't work with this filtering - but they might not want to reuse this trap if they come in and find it looks like a scene from a horror movie...
answered Jun 13 at 13:21
RycochetRycochet
21113
21113
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Not sure if this is optimal, but:
Take a set of 3 cards. Try the 3 combinations of pairs of cards (3 tries). If they all fail, at least 2 cards must be blue. Discard all 3.
Then worst case, after
33 sets of 3, you've discarded all the blue cards
So you're guaranteed to find two green on your
100th attempt
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
Then it doesn't work!! Thanks for pointing pointing that out
$endgroup$
– Mohirl
Jun 11 at 10:11
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Not sure if this is optimal, but:
Take a set of 3 cards. Try the 3 combinations of pairs of cards (3 tries). If they all fail, at least 2 cards must be blue. Discard all 3.
Then worst case, after
33 sets of 3, you've discarded all the blue cards
So you're guaranteed to find two green on your
100th attempt
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
Then it doesn't work!! Thanks for pointing pointing that out
$endgroup$
– Mohirl
Jun 11 at 10:11
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Not sure if this is optimal, but:
Take a set of 3 cards. Try the 3 combinations of pairs of cards (3 tries). If they all fail, at least 2 cards must be blue. Discard all 3.
Then worst case, after
33 sets of 3, you've discarded all the blue cards
So you're guaranteed to find two green on your
100th attempt
$endgroup$
Not sure if this is optimal, but:
Take a set of 3 cards. Try the 3 combinations of pairs of cards (3 tries). If they all fail, at least 2 cards must be blue. Discard all 3.
Then worst case, after
33 sets of 3, you've discarded all the blue cards
So you're guaranteed to find two green on your
100th attempt
edited Jun 11 at 10:13
answered Jun 11 at 10:04
MohirlMohirl
2,577719
2,577719
3
$begingroup$
Then it doesn't work!! Thanks for pointing pointing that out
$endgroup$
– Mohirl
Jun 11 at 10:11
add a comment |
3
$begingroup$
Then it doesn't work!! Thanks for pointing pointing that out
$endgroup$
– Mohirl
Jun 11 at 10:11
3
3
$begingroup$
Then it doesn't work!! Thanks for pointing pointing that out
$endgroup$
– Mohirl
Jun 11 at 10:11
$begingroup$
Then it doesn't work!! Thanks for pointing pointing that out
$endgroup$
– Mohirl
Jun 11 at 10:11
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The lower bound should be
This solution was for v1 problem. I wrote this one by mistake. Ill try the v2 problem.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You can delete and undelete your answer whenever you like. Probably best to in order to avoid downvotes.
$endgroup$
– wizzwizz4
Jun 13 at 13:40
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The lower bound should be
This solution was for v1 problem. I wrote this one by mistake. Ill try the v2 problem.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You can delete and undelete your answer whenever you like. Probably best to in order to avoid downvotes.
$endgroup$
– wizzwizz4
Jun 13 at 13:40
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The lower bound should be
This solution was for v1 problem. I wrote this one by mistake. Ill try the v2 problem.
$endgroup$
The lower bound should be
This solution was for v1 problem. I wrote this one by mistake. Ill try the v2 problem.
answered Jun 12 at 6:35
Venkateshwara RaoVenkateshwara Rao
11
11
$begingroup$
You can delete and undelete your answer whenever you like. Probably best to in order to avoid downvotes.
$endgroup$
– wizzwizz4
Jun 13 at 13:40
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You can delete and undelete your answer whenever you like. Probably best to in order to avoid downvotes.
$endgroup$
– wizzwizz4
Jun 13 at 13:40
$begingroup$
You can delete and undelete your answer whenever you like. Probably best to in order to avoid downvotes.
$endgroup$
– wizzwizz4
Jun 13 at 13:40
$begingroup$
You can delete and undelete your answer whenever you like. Probably best to in order to avoid downvotes.
$endgroup$
– wizzwizz4
Jun 13 at 13:40
add a comment |
protected by Community♦ Jun 12 at 8:47
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?
$begingroup$
I assume we get the cards back if we fail, right?
$endgroup$
– Moacir
Jun 12 at 13:51