How Much can You Win when Your Adversary is Handicapped?

  • Ludwig Staiger


We consider infinite games where a gambler plays a coin-tossing game against an adversary. The gambler puts stakes on heads or tails, and the adversary tosses a fair coin, but has to choose his outcome according to a previously given law known to the gambler. In other words, the adversary is not allowed to play all infinite heads-tails-sequences, but only a certain subset F of them.

We present an algorithm for the player which, depending on the structure of the set F, guarantees an optimal exponent of increase of the player’s capital, independently on which one of the allowed heads-tails-sequences the adversary chooses.

Using the known upper bound on the exponent provided by the maximum Kolmogorov complexity of sequences in F we show the optimality of our result.


Binary Tree Hausdorff Dimension Computable Function Kolmogorov Complexity Fair Coin 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    C. Calude, Information and Randomness. An Algorithmic Perspective. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1994.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    G. A. Edgar, Measure, Topology, and Fractal Geometry. Springer, New York, 1990.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    K.J. Falconer, Fractal Geometry. Wiley, Chichester, 1990.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    M. Li and P.M.B. Vitânyi, An Introduction to Kolmogorov Complexity and its Applications. Springer—Verlag, New York, 1993.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    B. Ya. Ryabko, “Noiseless coding of combinatorial sources, Hausdorff dimension, and Kolmogorov complexity”, Problemy Peredachi Informatsii, 22 1986, No. 3, 16–26 (in Russian; English tranitation: Problems of Information Transmission, 22, 1986, No. 3, 170–179 ).MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    B. Ya. Ryabko, “An algorithmic approach to prediction problems”, Problemy Peredachi Informatsii, 29, 1993, No. 2, 96–103 (in Russian).MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    C.P. Schnorr, Zufälligkeit und Wahrscheinlichkeit, Lecture Notes in Math. No. 218, Springer-Verlag, Berlin 1971.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    L. Staiger, “Kolmogorov complexity and Hausdorff dimension”, Inform. and Comput., 102, 1993, No. 2, 159 — 194.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    L. Staiger, “w-languages”, Handbook of Formal Languages, (G. Rozenberg and A. Salomaa Eds.), Vol. 3, Springer-Verlag, Berlin 1997, 339 — 387.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    L. Staiger, “A tight upper bound on Kolmogorov complexity and uniformly optimal prediction”, Theory of Computing Systems, 31, 1998, 215 — 229.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    M. van Lambalgen, Random sequences, Ph. D. Thesis, Univ. of Amsterdam, 1987.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    A.K. Zvonkin and L.A. Levin, “Complexity of finite objects and the development of the concepts of information and randomness by means of the theory of algorithms”, Russian Math. Surveys, 25, 1970, 83 —124.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ludwig Staiger
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für InformatikMartin-Luther-Universität Halle-WittenbergHalleGermany

Personalised recommendations