Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/100 prisoners problem

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:48, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

100 prisoners problem

[edit]
(
)

Cycles in a permutation

Created by Quartl (talk). Self nominated at 14:29, 30 June 2014 (UTC).

  • Article was created 30 June; it's a good long prose translation from German; it meets core policies; hook is formatted correctly but I would make adjustments; I would give it a pass on hook content because the hook is a colloquial wikilinked paraphrase of the last cited sentence of Optimality, "the cycle-following strategy has to be optimal"; looks like Quartl's first nomination; image meets criteria.
  • I am adding "in recreational mathematics," after "problem" and "(pictured)" after "circles".
  • I noticed this previously in Wikipedia:Requested articles/Mathematics#Recreational mathematics where another source appears; I will move that to the talkpage. Frieda Beamy (talk) 17:49, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
  • The new hook is fine with me, but the three "in"s in one sentence read a bit awkward. Maybe the "in recreational mathematics" is not really necessary. --Quartl (talk) 19:23, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
I'd leave the picture out: although clear at this resolution, it is not very exciting; it doesn't illustrate "running in circles" or "circles" as the indicated in the hook; and the hook is more intriguing without it. Belle (talk) 07:07, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
I've also left a query on the talk page (it's too long to go into here and when you tell me I'm stupid I don't want the DYK folk to see it and laugh) Belle (talk) 08:07, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
  • The query on the talk page has been resolved. Dropping the picture is fine with me. The ALT1 teaser looks good. --Quartl (talk) 09:57, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Might have a bit more intrigue as

  • ALT2: ... that 100 prisoners can run in circles to improve their chance of survival?

EEng (talk) 05:06, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestion, but I'd prefer to have the word "problem" included in the hook, otherwise it's too misleading. --Quartl (talk) 05:25, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

I leave the decision to you, but no one's gonna sue you for misleading them, and if we can trick a few readers into glancing at an article on graph theory, why not? EEng (talk) 05:27, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

I think the ALT1 teaser is misleading enough :-). --Quartl (talk) 05:30, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Repeating the tick, striking ALT2 and ALT0. I'd promote it myself but I still don't understand images. EEng (talk) 02:45, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

  • I've returned this from prep. Sorry, but when a hook says "running in circles" can solve the problem, one should be able to find the relevant part of the article by searching for either "run" or "circle", neither of which appear in the article. I guess I could verify this some other way, but it does a disservice to the readership to effectively hide the relevant content like this. I suggest either the article be tweaked to conform with the hook, or vice versa. Gatoclass (talk) 12:08, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
    • The "running in circles" refers to the cycle-following strategy mentioned in several places in the article. Like the first reviewer above said, it's a colloquial wikilinked paraphrase of the term. --Quartl (talk) 12:19, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
So why can't you put the "colloquial term" somewhere in the article? Gatoclass (talk) 12:26, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • In the article, I would prefer to use the more technical term. Many other articles on the subject, such as cyclic permutation or cycle notation refer to cycles as being "circular", so the transcription certainly isn't misleading. --Quartl (talk) 12:41, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
If you don't want to use the colloquial term in the article, I suggest you use the technical term in the hook so the two conform with one another. Readers should not be left to guess that "running in circles" means a mathematical cycle. Gatoclass (talk) 12:54, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Well that's what the wikilink in the hook is for. But I mentioned 'circular' in the article as requested. I also changed the wikilink in the hook to point to an article where 'cyclic' and 'circular' are mentioned as being the same and 'circle' is also mentioned. --Quartl (talk) 13:57, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Just a thought, but maybe the hook could say that the prisoners "cycle around" or "regular cycling improves their chances of survival" or something? EEng (talk) 15:07, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
We could even have them cycling in circles, but the cycling analogy is probably a bit too far fetched. --Quartl (talk) 16:16, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Maybe they could cycle in their drawers [1] or cycle while looking in their drawers? There are a lot of winking possibilities here. EEng (talk) 16:35, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
... that 100 prisoners improve their chances of survival by cycling their drawers? – nope, definitely doesn't work out... --Quartl (talk) 16:51, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Dammit, every good problem like this has a catchy story involving prisoners, doors/drawers, and executions. Why isn't this coming together? Can we work in a goat, or a tiger somehow? EEng (talk) 16:55, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Now that EEng mentions it, I think "cycling" by itself probably would work. ie:
*ALT3: ... that in the 100 prisoners problem in recreational mathematics, the prisoners improve their chances of survival by cycling (pictured)? Gatoclass (talk) 11:16, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
If you go for that one, don't use the picture as it removes any "hook" from the hook. (Reader: Cycling? Like the Tour de France? Really? I'm intrigued. DYK: No, like the dry sequencing diagram on the right. [Reader yawns]) Belle (talk) 11:28, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
I agree about the picture. But if you're now ready to accept 'cycling' in the hook you could as well accept 'running in circles' which I believe to be more subtle. But it's your choice. --Quartl (talk) 11:51, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
EEng suggested I look at this. How about
It has the same flavor of the original hook but without the wrongness of calling these things circles? —David Eppstein (talk) 17:21, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, would be fine with me as well. --Quartl (talk) 17:43, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
I already altered ALT0 so here goes again. EEng is right; Monty Hall and the goat, which are in the article, give more bang for the buck:
No picture. This is the sort of thing the puzzle is about, and this form is much easier than to say (as in the original form) the real surprise, which is that .5^100 can be converted cagily into 1-ln2. I think someone should pick and close. Frieda Beamy (talk) 19:52, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Monty Hall and the goat are already in the article??? I did not know that! -- totally made that up! I'm a hook-writing idiot savant! EEng (talk) 20:41, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Now we're cookin' with gas!

Note I delinked game show (feel free to relink if y'all feel that's better) and changed the link behind goat to booby prize. We could also drop two or incommunicado or both, according to taste.

That should get clicks. Why, with luck this article could become the subject of a big Arbcom case. EEng (talk) 20:44, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

We've got it! Booby prize is the link I was looking for, and incommunicado is the word. I still like "to correlate success" but you're even swaying me on that point. Frieda Beamy (talk) 22:07, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Let me say that I have a degree in applied mathematics and statistics but have no idea what "correlate success" means. EEng (talk) 22:58, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, but the game show is quite different from the original and just a minor point in the article. If ALT1 is not accepted, just replace running in circles by following cycles as suggested by David Eppstein above:

This formulation is covered in the article and fine with me. --Quartl (talk) 03:55, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned it should be your choice in the end, but let me just say this. Regardless of how small a place they have in the article, Monty Hall + goat are guaranteed to get you a zillion clicks. In the hook business there's no shame in pandering, so I suggest you pander. EEng (talk) 04:05, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Honestly, I don't know what's the allowed amount of catchyness here. You guys and gals have much more experience than me, so I leave it all up to you. --Quartl (talk) 08:54, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Paging reviewer. EEng (talk) 16:54, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
    • I thought I was not allowed to approve, but I guess I can approve ALT6, and I do. Let's escape now, unless the next player disagrees and wants us to run in another circle. Frieda Beamy (talk) 18:25, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/100_prisoners_problem&oldid=777026339"