Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > General Gambling > Probability

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-27-2007, 09:56 PM
pzhon pzhon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,515
Default Random walk on a symmetric interval

I stumbled on an amusing fact about random walks. Does it agree with your intuition?

Suppose you play a freezeout where you and your opponent start with n chips each. You wager a chip at a time, winning with probability p. Claim: Whether you win is independent of the time it takes to complete the freezeout. That is, the conditional probability that you win in t steps does not depend on t (when it makes sense). It's always equal to the probability of winning overall. In particular, the probability of winning is the probability of winning given that the freezezout is over in n steps: p^n / (p^n + (1-p)^n).

The same is true for Brownian motion with drift.

Here is a quick proof for the discrete version: The reflection of any path to victory in t steps is a path to defeat, and vice versa. This bijection changes the probability of a winning path by changing n extra victories to defeats, which multiplies the probability by ((1-p)/p)^n, so the probability of losing is ((1-p)/p)^n times the probability of winning. [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

The analogous statement is false for asymmetric intervals. If your friend plays a (limit) freezeout against someone, and you see that at some point, your friend is ahead, then you do get some information about the outcome as you wait (without watching).
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-29-2007, 10:05 AM
starbird starbird is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Carthago delenda est
Posts: 44
Default Re: Random walk on a symmetric interval

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] random walk theory.

[ QUOTE ]
The analogous statement is false for asymmetric intervals.

[/ QUOTE ]

This should be clear from the fact that if there are 2n chips, only the leader can win in n steps.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-30-2007, 06:45 AM
pzhon pzhon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,515
Default Re: Random walk on a symmetric interval

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
The analogous statement is false for asymmetric intervals.

[/ QUOTE ]

This should be clear from the fact that if there are 2n chips, only the leader can win in n steps.

[/ QUOTE ]
Right. It's also false in the continuous case, where you can't make an argument like that quite as easily, but you can still show that a nearly instantaneous vistory is much more likely for the player who starts with the larger stack. Qualitatively, how does the conditional probability of winning vary with time?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.