赌博的格子

P. Cuff, T. Cover, G. Kumar, Lei Zhao
{"title":"赌博的格子","authors":"P. Cuff, T. Cover, G. Kumar, Lei Zhao","doi":"10.1109/ISIT.2011.6033851","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A gambler walks into a hypothetical fair casino with a very real dollar bill, but by the time he leaves he's exchanged that for a random amount of money. What is lost in the process? It may be that the gambler walks out at the end of the day, after a roller-coaster ride of winning and losing, with his dollar still intact—or maybe even with two dollars. But what the gambler loses the moment he places his first bet is position. He exchanges one distribution of money for a distribution of lesser value, and he can't get back to the original distribution. Our first discussion in this work connects known results of economic inequality and majorization to the probability theory of gambling and Martingales. We provide a simple proof that fair gambles cannot increase the Lorenz curve, and we also constructively demonstrate that any sequence of non-increasing Lorenz curves corresponds to at least one Martingale. We next consider the efficiency of gambles. If any fair gamble is available then one can move down the lattice of distributions with respect to the Lorenz ordering. The step from one distribution to the next is not unique. Is there a sense of efficiency with which one can move down the Lorenz stream? One approach would be to minimize the average total volume of money placed on the table. In this case, it turns out that implementing part of the strategy using private randomness can help reduce the need for the casino's randomness, resulting in less money on the table that the casino can get its hands on.","PeriodicalId":208375,"journal":{"name":"2011 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory Proceedings","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A lattice of gambles\",\"authors\":\"P. Cuff, T. Cover, G. Kumar, Lei Zhao\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ISIT.2011.6033851\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A gambler walks into a hypothetical fair casino with a very real dollar bill, but by the time he leaves he's exchanged that for a random amount of money. What is lost in the process? It may be that the gambler walks out at the end of the day, after a roller-coaster ride of winning and losing, with his dollar still intact—or maybe even with two dollars. But what the gambler loses the moment he places his first bet is position. He exchanges one distribution of money for a distribution of lesser value, and he can't get back to the original distribution. Our first discussion in this work connects known results of economic inequality and majorization to the probability theory of gambling and Martingales. We provide a simple proof that fair gambles cannot increase the Lorenz curve, and we also constructively demonstrate that any sequence of non-increasing Lorenz curves corresponds to at least one Martingale. We next consider the efficiency of gambles. If any fair gamble is available then one can move down the lattice of distributions with respect to the Lorenz ordering. The step from one distribution to the next is not unique. Is there a sense of efficiency with which one can move down the Lorenz stream? One approach would be to minimize the average total volume of money placed on the table. In this case, it turns out that implementing part of the strategy using private randomness can help reduce the need for the casino's randomness, resulting in less money on the table that the casino can get its hands on.\",\"PeriodicalId\":208375,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2011 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory Proceedings\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2011 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory Proceedings\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ISIT.2011.6033851\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2011 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory Proceedings","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ISIT.2011.6033851","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

一个赌徒带着一张非常真实的美元钞票走进一个假想的公平赌场,但当他离开的时候,他已经把这张钞票换成了随机数量的钱。在这个过程中失去了什么?可能是赌徒在经历了输赢的过山车之后,在一天结束时离开,他的1美元仍然完好无损,甚至可能只有2美元。但是赌徒在第一次下注的那一刻失去的是他的位置。他用一种货币分配换取一种价值更低的货币分配,他无法回到原来的分配。我们在这项工作中的第一个讨论将经济不平等和多数化的已知结果与赌博和鞅的概率论联系起来。我们提供了一个简单的证明,证明公平赌博不能增加洛伦兹曲线,并建设性地证明了任何非增加的洛伦兹曲线序列至少对应一个鞅。接下来我们考虑赌博的效率。如果有任何公平的赌博,那么人们可以沿着洛伦兹排序的分布格向下移动。从一个发行版到下一个发行版的步骤并不是唯一的。有没有一种效率感可以让我们沿着洛伦兹流前进?一种方法是尽量减少赌桌上的平均总金额。在这种情况下,事实证明,使用私有随机性执行部分策略可以帮助减少对赌场随机性的需求,从而减少赌场可以拿到的牌桌上的钱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A lattice of gambles
A gambler walks into a hypothetical fair casino with a very real dollar bill, but by the time he leaves he's exchanged that for a random amount of money. What is lost in the process? It may be that the gambler walks out at the end of the day, after a roller-coaster ride of winning and losing, with his dollar still intact—or maybe even with two dollars. But what the gambler loses the moment he places his first bet is position. He exchanges one distribution of money for a distribution of lesser value, and he can't get back to the original distribution. Our first discussion in this work connects known results of economic inequality and majorization to the probability theory of gambling and Martingales. We provide a simple proof that fair gambles cannot increase the Lorenz curve, and we also constructively demonstrate that any sequence of non-increasing Lorenz curves corresponds to at least one Martingale. We next consider the efficiency of gambles. If any fair gamble is available then one can move down the lattice of distributions with respect to the Lorenz ordering. The step from one distribution to the next is not unique. Is there a sense of efficiency with which one can move down the Lorenz stream? One approach would be to minimize the average total volume of money placed on the table. In this case, it turns out that implementing part of the strategy using private randomness can help reduce the need for the casino's randomness, resulting in less money on the table that the casino can get its hands on.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信