Content deleted Content added
m Open access bot: doi added to citation with #oabot. |
Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5) (AManWithNoPlan - 15990 |
||
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 4:
Some games with relatively small [[game tree]]s have been proven to be first or second-player wins. For example, the game of [[nim]] with the classic 3–4–5 starting position is a first-player-win game. However, Nim with the 1-3-5-7 starting position is a second-player-win. The classic game of [[Connect Four]] has been mathematically proven to be first-player-win.
With perfect play, [[English draughts|checkers]] has been determined to be a draw; neither player can force a win.<ref>{{cite journal
Significant theory has been completed in the effort to [[Solving chess|solve chess]]. It has been speculated that there may be [[First-move advantage in chess|first-move advantage]] which can be detected when the game is played imperfectly (such as with all humans and all current [[chess engine]]s). However, with perfect play, it remains unsolved as to whether the game is a first-player win (White), a second player win (Black), or a forced draw.<ref>J.W.H.M. Uiterwijk, H.J. van den Herik. [https://web.archive.org/web/20180109064212/https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/55dd/2fee1f0981fbfabd4b158a6584eefaacbcea.pdf "The Advantage of the Initiative]". (August 1999).</ref><ref>{{cite journal
Line 21:
|archive-date=2010-07-06
|url-status=dead
}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
▲| author = Victor Allis
|url=http://www.dphu.org/uploads/attachements/books/books_3721_0.pdf
|title=PhD thesis: Searching for Solutions in Games and Artificial Intelligence
Line 31 ⟶ 30:
|access-date=2012-07-14
|author-link=Victor Allis
|archive-date=2020-11-22
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201122211341/https://www.dphu.org/uploads/attachements/books/books_3721_0.pdf
|url-status=dead
}}</ref>
|