Combinatorics Seminar

When: Sunday, April 29, 10am
Where: Schreiber 309
Speaker: Dan Hefetz, Tel Aviv University
Title: Fast and slow winning strategies in Positional Games

Abstract:

The theory of Positional Games is a relatively young area of Combinatorics, though its origins can be traced back to Classical Game Theory. Its goal is to give a mathematical framework for analyzing games of thought.It is strongly related to mainstream areas of Combinatorics, such as Ramsey Theory and the theory of Random Graphs.

Formally, a positional game is a four-tuple (p,q,X,F), where the set X is called the ``board'', F is a family of "target" subsets of X, and the positive integers p and q are the ``biases'' of the players. During the game, two players take turns selecting previously unclaimed elements of the board. The first player selects p elements per move, and the second player selects q elements per move. There are several types of positional games with different rules for determining the winner. We focus on the following two:

In a Maker/Breaker-type positional game, the two players are called Maker and Breaker and F is referred to as the family of ``winning sets''. Maker wins the game if the set he has claimed by the end of the game (that is, when every element of the board has been claimed by one of the players) is a winning set, that is, an element of F; otherwise Breaker wins. A classical example of the Maker-Breaker setting is the popular board-game HEX. Putting aside a few scattered results, the theory of Maker-Breaker games started with a general criterion of Erdos and Selfridge for Breaker's win in the (1,1) game. Subsequently, Beck started a systematic study of Maker-Breaker games with a bias.

In an Avoider/Enforcer-type positional game, the players are called Avoider and Enforcer and F is called the family of ``losing sets''. Avoider wins the game if the set he has claimed by the end of the game is not a losing set, that is, not an element of F; otherwise Enforcer wins. These games are considered less natural than their Maker-Breaker analog, as Avoider's goal is not to claim a winning set. However, they prove to be very interesting in their own right as well as useful for analyzing Maker-Breaker games.

I will overview some of the results of the thesis, focusing on "fast" winning strategies in Maker-Breaker and Avoider-Enforcer games.