Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #14992

Re: Slightly off-topic: Determining the strength of "Hangman" word.

Show all headers | View raw

Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> Roedy Green wrote:
>> Daniel Pitts wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>>> The problem is that some words are false positives.  They seem ambiguous 
>>> for the most part, but one letter absolutely gives it away.
> >
>> This is a messy problem. For every guessing strategy you need a
>> different algorithm to determine difficulty. But if you have enough
>> algorithms that each say produce a number 0..1 you can take the max as
>> the guessability or the sum, or something in between that gives extra
>> weight to high components (sum of cubes?)

Not really. A statistical approach, that is, analysis of a large number of games
for frequency of words chosen, number of guesses by the opponent and if 
the opponent guessed the word, should account for strategies that include 
picking "easy" words and how well that works.

You don't even need to know the guessing strategies involved.

>      Suppose someone games your choice of algorithms by choosing words
> to give bad results by those algorithms.

They'd have to know what the algorithms are, and there has to be such a 
thing as a "bad result". A statistical approach uses facts - what actually 
happened. This is hard to game. If a player picks a word that is easy to 
guess, then their opponent is likely to guess it quickly. This is especially true 
if the results from games are fed back into the learning system so that it 
can adapt to sneaky opponents.

-- 
Lew

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Slightly off-topic: Determining the strength of "Hangman" word. Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2012-05-31 09:26 -0700
  Re: Slightly off-topic: Determining the strength of "Hangman" word. Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-05-31 09:44 -0700
  Re: Slightly off-topic: Determining the strength of "Hangman" word. Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-05-31 10:43 -0700
    Re: Slightly off-topic: Determining the strength of "Hangman" word. Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2012-05-31 11:34 -0700
      Re: Slightly off-topic: Determining the strength of "Hangman" word. Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-06-01 02:55 -0700
        Re: Slightly off-topic: Determining the strength of "Hangman" word. Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-06-01 09:34 -0700
          Re: Slightly off-topic: Determining the strength of "Hangman" word. Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-06-01 11:58 -0700
            Re: Slightly off-topic: Determining the strength of "Hangman" word. Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-06-01 12:46 -0700
          Re: Slightly off-topic: Determining the strength of "Hangman" word. Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-06-01 12:45 -0700
            Re: Slightly off-topic: Determining the strength of "Hangman" word. Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-06-01 13:46 -0700

csiph-web