Turning a Biased Coin into an Unbiased one Deterministically
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Non-deterministic Exact Algorithm
There is a simple algorithm to turn a biased coin into a fair one:
- Flip the coin twice.
- Identify HT with H and TH with T.
- Discard cases HH and TT.
This algorithm produces a perfectly fair coin, but it is non-deterministic.
Deterministic Approximation
I also know it is possible to approximate a fair coin with a deterministic algorithm:
Let $C_0$ be the biased coin and define $C_1$ by flipping $C_0$ twice. $C_1$ is H if $C_0$ was HH or TT, and $C_1$ is T if $C_0$ was HT or TH.
We can see that if the probability that $C_0$ was heads is $p$, then the probability that $C_1$ is heads is $p_1 = 1 - 2p(1 - p)$. This is a parabola connecting $(0,1), (.5,.5)$, and $(1,1)$ and we can see that if we assume $0<p<1$ then the function has a fixed point at $0.5$. Since $0.5 < p_1 < p$ if $p>0.5$ and $0.5<p_1<1$ if $p<0.5$, then we can see that a fixed point iteration with $0<p<1$ will always converge to $0.5$. Therefore, we can find a deterministic $C_i$ that is arbitrarily fair (defined by flipping $C_{i-1}$ twice).
My Problem
I am trying to find out if, given some biased coin with rational probability of heads $p$, we can construct an algorithm to solve this problem that is both deterministic and exact. Does anyone have any insights?
(Note that the algorithm only has to work for a fixed probability $p$, since as pointed out in the comments and answer, there are some $p$, e.g., $p = 1/3$ for which there is no such algorithm.)
probability combinatorics algorithms
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Non-deterministic Exact Algorithm
There is a simple algorithm to turn a biased coin into a fair one:
- Flip the coin twice.
- Identify HT with H and TH with T.
- Discard cases HH and TT.
This algorithm produces a perfectly fair coin, but it is non-deterministic.
Deterministic Approximation
I also know it is possible to approximate a fair coin with a deterministic algorithm:
Let $C_0$ be the biased coin and define $C_1$ by flipping $C_0$ twice. $C_1$ is H if $C_0$ was HH or TT, and $C_1$ is T if $C_0$ was HT or TH.
We can see that if the probability that $C_0$ was heads is $p$, then the probability that $C_1$ is heads is $p_1 = 1 - 2p(1 - p)$. This is a parabola connecting $(0,1), (.5,.5)$, and $(1,1)$ and we can see that if we assume $0<p<1$ then the function has a fixed point at $0.5$. Since $0.5 < p_1 < p$ if $p>0.5$ and $0.5<p_1<1$ if $p<0.5$, then we can see that a fixed point iteration with $0<p<1$ will always converge to $0.5$. Therefore, we can find a deterministic $C_i$ that is arbitrarily fair (defined by flipping $C_{i-1}$ twice).
My Problem
I am trying to find out if, given some biased coin with rational probability of heads $p$, we can construct an algorithm to solve this problem that is both deterministic and exact. Does anyone have any insights?
(Note that the algorithm only has to work for a fixed probability $p$, since as pointed out in the comments and answer, there are some $p$, e.g., $p = 1/3$ for which there is no such algorithm.)
probability combinatorics algorithms
1
Do we know $p$ beforehand? Can the algorithm depend on $p$? There is no algorithm that works for all $p$, but for some values of $p$, such as $frac{1}{4}$ it is possible to have a deterministic algorithm.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:04
1
Yes, we know $p$ beforehand, so we can take as much time as we need to pre-compute, say, a decision tree. I'll update this in the question.
– helper
Nov 16 at 14:44
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Non-deterministic Exact Algorithm
There is a simple algorithm to turn a biased coin into a fair one:
- Flip the coin twice.
- Identify HT with H and TH with T.
- Discard cases HH and TT.
This algorithm produces a perfectly fair coin, but it is non-deterministic.
Deterministic Approximation
I also know it is possible to approximate a fair coin with a deterministic algorithm:
Let $C_0$ be the biased coin and define $C_1$ by flipping $C_0$ twice. $C_1$ is H if $C_0$ was HH or TT, and $C_1$ is T if $C_0$ was HT or TH.
We can see that if the probability that $C_0$ was heads is $p$, then the probability that $C_1$ is heads is $p_1 = 1 - 2p(1 - p)$. This is a parabola connecting $(0,1), (.5,.5)$, and $(1,1)$ and we can see that if we assume $0<p<1$ then the function has a fixed point at $0.5$. Since $0.5 < p_1 < p$ if $p>0.5$ and $0.5<p_1<1$ if $p<0.5$, then we can see that a fixed point iteration with $0<p<1$ will always converge to $0.5$. Therefore, we can find a deterministic $C_i$ that is arbitrarily fair (defined by flipping $C_{i-1}$ twice).
My Problem
I am trying to find out if, given some biased coin with rational probability of heads $p$, we can construct an algorithm to solve this problem that is both deterministic and exact. Does anyone have any insights?
(Note that the algorithm only has to work for a fixed probability $p$, since as pointed out in the comments and answer, there are some $p$, e.g., $p = 1/3$ for which there is no such algorithm.)
probability combinatorics algorithms
Non-deterministic Exact Algorithm
There is a simple algorithm to turn a biased coin into a fair one:
- Flip the coin twice.
- Identify HT with H and TH with T.
- Discard cases HH and TT.
This algorithm produces a perfectly fair coin, but it is non-deterministic.
Deterministic Approximation
I also know it is possible to approximate a fair coin with a deterministic algorithm:
Let $C_0$ be the biased coin and define $C_1$ by flipping $C_0$ twice. $C_1$ is H if $C_0$ was HH or TT, and $C_1$ is T if $C_0$ was HT or TH.
We can see that if the probability that $C_0$ was heads is $p$, then the probability that $C_1$ is heads is $p_1 = 1 - 2p(1 - p)$. This is a parabola connecting $(0,1), (.5,.5)$, and $(1,1)$ and we can see that if we assume $0<p<1$ then the function has a fixed point at $0.5$. Since $0.5 < p_1 < p$ if $p>0.5$ and $0.5<p_1<1$ if $p<0.5$, then we can see that a fixed point iteration with $0<p<1$ will always converge to $0.5$. Therefore, we can find a deterministic $C_i$ that is arbitrarily fair (defined by flipping $C_{i-1}$ twice).
My Problem
I am trying to find out if, given some biased coin with rational probability of heads $p$, we can construct an algorithm to solve this problem that is both deterministic and exact. Does anyone have any insights?
(Note that the algorithm only has to work for a fixed probability $p$, since as pointed out in the comments and answer, there are some $p$, e.g., $p = 1/3$ for which there is no such algorithm.)
probability combinatorics algorithms
probability combinatorics algorithms
edited Nov 16 at 14:49
asked Nov 16 at 7:04
helper
523212
523212
1
Do we know $p$ beforehand? Can the algorithm depend on $p$? There is no algorithm that works for all $p$, but for some values of $p$, such as $frac{1}{4}$ it is possible to have a deterministic algorithm.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:04
1
Yes, we know $p$ beforehand, so we can take as much time as we need to pre-compute, say, a decision tree. I'll update this in the question.
– helper
Nov 16 at 14:44
add a comment |
1
Do we know $p$ beforehand? Can the algorithm depend on $p$? There is no algorithm that works for all $p$, but for some values of $p$, such as $frac{1}{4}$ it is possible to have a deterministic algorithm.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:04
1
Yes, we know $p$ beforehand, so we can take as much time as we need to pre-compute, say, a decision tree. I'll update this in the question.
– helper
Nov 16 at 14:44
1
1
Do we know $p$ beforehand? Can the algorithm depend on $p$? There is no algorithm that works for all $p$, but for some values of $p$, such as $frac{1}{4}$ it is possible to have a deterministic algorithm.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:04
Do we know $p$ beforehand? Can the algorithm depend on $p$? There is no algorithm that works for all $p$, but for some values of $p$, such as $frac{1}{4}$ it is possible to have a deterministic algorithm.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:04
1
1
Yes, we know $p$ beforehand, so we can take as much time as we need to pre-compute, say, a decision tree. I'll update this in the question.
– helper
Nov 16 at 14:44
Yes, we know $p$ beforehand, so we can take as much time as we need to pre-compute, say, a decision tree. I'll update this in the question.
– helper
Nov 16 at 14:44
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
An algorithm that works for any $p$ doesn't exist. It is possible to solve the problem for some $p$.
Let $p$ be the probability of heads.
Consider a deterministic algorithm $F$ which uses $n$ tosses. Denote $A$ the set of all possible sequences of $n$ coin tosses ($|A| = 2^n$). The $F$ is essentially a function $F: A to {0, 1}$, which returns 0 (heads) for some sequences of $n$ tosses, and 1 (tails) for the rest.
Our deterministic algorithm defines two sets, $H = {v in A | F(v) = 0}$ - the set of $n$-toss sequences where out algorithm decided heads, and $T = A setminus H$, such that $mathbb{P}[H] = mathbb{P}[T] = 0.5$.
On the other hand, for any sequence $v in A$ denote $h(v)$ be the number of tails in $v$.
$$mathbb{P}[H] = sum_{v in H}mathbb{P}[v] = sum_{v in H} p^{h(v)}(1-p)^{n - h(v)} {hspace{2cm}} [1]$$
We need to make this $frac{1}{2}$.
Let $p = frac{r}{q}$ when fully reduced. Then
$$p^{h(v)}(1-p)^{n - h(v)} = frac{r^{h(v)}(q-r)^{n-h(v)}}{q^n}$$
Let's count how many times each possible value of $h(v)$ appears in the sum [1]:
Denote $c_k = |{v | v in H text{ and } h(v)=k }|$. Then [1] becomes
$$mathbb{P}[H] = sum_{k=0}^n c_k frac{r^{k}(q-r)^{n-k}}{q^n} =
frac{sum_{k=0}^n c_k r^{k}(q-r)^{n-k}}{q^n} = frac{1}{2}$$
An algorithm that works for all $p$ doesn't exist, because if $q$ is odd, there is no way to introduce a factor of $2$ in the denominator of this expression. The best we can do is, given a $p$, try to find an algorithm that works for that specific $p$, or determine that such doesn't exist.
Since there are $n choose k$ sequences of coin tosses with length $n$ and $k$ heads, we also need $c_k leq {n choose k}$.
If $q$ is even, and we have a solution to the following equation, satisfying the bounds on $c_k$
$$sum_{k=0}^n c_k r^{k}(q-r)^{n-k} = frac{q^n}{2}$$
Then we can simply include $c_k$ sequences containing $k$ heads in $H$ for each $k$ to get our algorithm.
Note that this equation has finitely many potential solutions, so we can simply try them all.
New contributor
1
The problem says $p$ is rational. I think you can modify your arguments to $mathbb{P}[H]$ has denominator of the form $q^m$, which is an odd number, where $p = frac{q'}{q}$, so there is a solution only when $p=frac{1}{2}$.
– Qidi
Nov 16 at 9:44
My bad I missed that. Thanks for the tip.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 10:17
You mean there are some $p$ for which there is no algorithm. For some $p$ it is possible, for instance $p=1/4$.
– Michal Adamaszek
Nov 16 at 10:57
@Michael Adamaszek Yes. The way I understand the problem, you don't actually know $p$ beforehand to be able to tune your algorithm to it. Indeed, both example algorithms shown in the first post work for any $p$ unaltered. But it is worth clarifying that.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:02
Updated answer to include the case when we want an algorithm for a specific $p$.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:44
|
show 1 more comment
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
An algorithm that works for any $p$ doesn't exist. It is possible to solve the problem for some $p$.
Let $p$ be the probability of heads.
Consider a deterministic algorithm $F$ which uses $n$ tosses. Denote $A$ the set of all possible sequences of $n$ coin tosses ($|A| = 2^n$). The $F$ is essentially a function $F: A to {0, 1}$, which returns 0 (heads) for some sequences of $n$ tosses, and 1 (tails) for the rest.
Our deterministic algorithm defines two sets, $H = {v in A | F(v) = 0}$ - the set of $n$-toss sequences where out algorithm decided heads, and $T = A setminus H$, such that $mathbb{P}[H] = mathbb{P}[T] = 0.5$.
On the other hand, for any sequence $v in A$ denote $h(v)$ be the number of tails in $v$.
$$mathbb{P}[H] = sum_{v in H}mathbb{P}[v] = sum_{v in H} p^{h(v)}(1-p)^{n - h(v)} {hspace{2cm}} [1]$$
We need to make this $frac{1}{2}$.
Let $p = frac{r}{q}$ when fully reduced. Then
$$p^{h(v)}(1-p)^{n - h(v)} = frac{r^{h(v)}(q-r)^{n-h(v)}}{q^n}$$
Let's count how many times each possible value of $h(v)$ appears in the sum [1]:
Denote $c_k = |{v | v in H text{ and } h(v)=k }|$. Then [1] becomes
$$mathbb{P}[H] = sum_{k=0}^n c_k frac{r^{k}(q-r)^{n-k}}{q^n} =
frac{sum_{k=0}^n c_k r^{k}(q-r)^{n-k}}{q^n} = frac{1}{2}$$
An algorithm that works for all $p$ doesn't exist, because if $q$ is odd, there is no way to introduce a factor of $2$ in the denominator of this expression. The best we can do is, given a $p$, try to find an algorithm that works for that specific $p$, or determine that such doesn't exist.
Since there are $n choose k$ sequences of coin tosses with length $n$ and $k$ heads, we also need $c_k leq {n choose k}$.
If $q$ is even, and we have a solution to the following equation, satisfying the bounds on $c_k$
$$sum_{k=0}^n c_k r^{k}(q-r)^{n-k} = frac{q^n}{2}$$
Then we can simply include $c_k$ sequences containing $k$ heads in $H$ for each $k$ to get our algorithm.
Note that this equation has finitely many potential solutions, so we can simply try them all.
New contributor
1
The problem says $p$ is rational. I think you can modify your arguments to $mathbb{P}[H]$ has denominator of the form $q^m$, which is an odd number, where $p = frac{q'}{q}$, so there is a solution only when $p=frac{1}{2}$.
– Qidi
Nov 16 at 9:44
My bad I missed that. Thanks for the tip.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 10:17
You mean there are some $p$ for which there is no algorithm. For some $p$ it is possible, for instance $p=1/4$.
– Michal Adamaszek
Nov 16 at 10:57
@Michael Adamaszek Yes. The way I understand the problem, you don't actually know $p$ beforehand to be able to tune your algorithm to it. Indeed, both example algorithms shown in the first post work for any $p$ unaltered. But it is worth clarifying that.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:02
Updated answer to include the case when we want an algorithm for a specific $p$.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:44
|
show 1 more comment
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
An algorithm that works for any $p$ doesn't exist. It is possible to solve the problem for some $p$.
Let $p$ be the probability of heads.
Consider a deterministic algorithm $F$ which uses $n$ tosses. Denote $A$ the set of all possible sequences of $n$ coin tosses ($|A| = 2^n$). The $F$ is essentially a function $F: A to {0, 1}$, which returns 0 (heads) for some sequences of $n$ tosses, and 1 (tails) for the rest.
Our deterministic algorithm defines two sets, $H = {v in A | F(v) = 0}$ - the set of $n$-toss sequences where out algorithm decided heads, and $T = A setminus H$, such that $mathbb{P}[H] = mathbb{P}[T] = 0.5$.
On the other hand, for any sequence $v in A$ denote $h(v)$ be the number of tails in $v$.
$$mathbb{P}[H] = sum_{v in H}mathbb{P}[v] = sum_{v in H} p^{h(v)}(1-p)^{n - h(v)} {hspace{2cm}} [1]$$
We need to make this $frac{1}{2}$.
Let $p = frac{r}{q}$ when fully reduced. Then
$$p^{h(v)}(1-p)^{n - h(v)} = frac{r^{h(v)}(q-r)^{n-h(v)}}{q^n}$$
Let's count how many times each possible value of $h(v)$ appears in the sum [1]:
Denote $c_k = |{v | v in H text{ and } h(v)=k }|$. Then [1] becomes
$$mathbb{P}[H] = sum_{k=0}^n c_k frac{r^{k}(q-r)^{n-k}}{q^n} =
frac{sum_{k=0}^n c_k r^{k}(q-r)^{n-k}}{q^n} = frac{1}{2}$$
An algorithm that works for all $p$ doesn't exist, because if $q$ is odd, there is no way to introduce a factor of $2$ in the denominator of this expression. The best we can do is, given a $p$, try to find an algorithm that works for that specific $p$, or determine that such doesn't exist.
Since there are $n choose k$ sequences of coin tosses with length $n$ and $k$ heads, we also need $c_k leq {n choose k}$.
If $q$ is even, and we have a solution to the following equation, satisfying the bounds on $c_k$
$$sum_{k=0}^n c_k r^{k}(q-r)^{n-k} = frac{q^n}{2}$$
Then we can simply include $c_k$ sequences containing $k$ heads in $H$ for each $k$ to get our algorithm.
Note that this equation has finitely many potential solutions, so we can simply try them all.
New contributor
1
The problem says $p$ is rational. I think you can modify your arguments to $mathbb{P}[H]$ has denominator of the form $q^m$, which is an odd number, where $p = frac{q'}{q}$, so there is a solution only when $p=frac{1}{2}$.
– Qidi
Nov 16 at 9:44
My bad I missed that. Thanks for the tip.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 10:17
You mean there are some $p$ for which there is no algorithm. For some $p$ it is possible, for instance $p=1/4$.
– Michal Adamaszek
Nov 16 at 10:57
@Michael Adamaszek Yes. The way I understand the problem, you don't actually know $p$ beforehand to be able to tune your algorithm to it. Indeed, both example algorithms shown in the first post work for any $p$ unaltered. But it is worth clarifying that.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:02
Updated answer to include the case when we want an algorithm for a specific $p$.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:44
|
show 1 more comment
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
An algorithm that works for any $p$ doesn't exist. It is possible to solve the problem for some $p$.
Let $p$ be the probability of heads.
Consider a deterministic algorithm $F$ which uses $n$ tosses. Denote $A$ the set of all possible sequences of $n$ coin tosses ($|A| = 2^n$). The $F$ is essentially a function $F: A to {0, 1}$, which returns 0 (heads) for some sequences of $n$ tosses, and 1 (tails) for the rest.
Our deterministic algorithm defines two sets, $H = {v in A | F(v) = 0}$ - the set of $n$-toss sequences where out algorithm decided heads, and $T = A setminus H$, such that $mathbb{P}[H] = mathbb{P}[T] = 0.5$.
On the other hand, for any sequence $v in A$ denote $h(v)$ be the number of tails in $v$.
$$mathbb{P}[H] = sum_{v in H}mathbb{P}[v] = sum_{v in H} p^{h(v)}(1-p)^{n - h(v)} {hspace{2cm}} [1]$$
We need to make this $frac{1}{2}$.
Let $p = frac{r}{q}$ when fully reduced. Then
$$p^{h(v)}(1-p)^{n - h(v)} = frac{r^{h(v)}(q-r)^{n-h(v)}}{q^n}$$
Let's count how many times each possible value of $h(v)$ appears in the sum [1]:
Denote $c_k = |{v | v in H text{ and } h(v)=k }|$. Then [1] becomes
$$mathbb{P}[H] = sum_{k=0}^n c_k frac{r^{k}(q-r)^{n-k}}{q^n} =
frac{sum_{k=0}^n c_k r^{k}(q-r)^{n-k}}{q^n} = frac{1}{2}$$
An algorithm that works for all $p$ doesn't exist, because if $q$ is odd, there is no way to introduce a factor of $2$ in the denominator of this expression. The best we can do is, given a $p$, try to find an algorithm that works for that specific $p$, or determine that such doesn't exist.
Since there are $n choose k$ sequences of coin tosses with length $n$ and $k$ heads, we also need $c_k leq {n choose k}$.
If $q$ is even, and we have a solution to the following equation, satisfying the bounds on $c_k$
$$sum_{k=0}^n c_k r^{k}(q-r)^{n-k} = frac{q^n}{2}$$
Then we can simply include $c_k$ sequences containing $k$ heads in $H$ for each $k$ to get our algorithm.
Note that this equation has finitely many potential solutions, so we can simply try them all.
New contributor
An algorithm that works for any $p$ doesn't exist. It is possible to solve the problem for some $p$.
Let $p$ be the probability of heads.
Consider a deterministic algorithm $F$ which uses $n$ tosses. Denote $A$ the set of all possible sequences of $n$ coin tosses ($|A| = 2^n$). The $F$ is essentially a function $F: A to {0, 1}$, which returns 0 (heads) for some sequences of $n$ tosses, and 1 (tails) for the rest.
Our deterministic algorithm defines two sets, $H = {v in A | F(v) = 0}$ - the set of $n$-toss sequences where out algorithm decided heads, and $T = A setminus H$, such that $mathbb{P}[H] = mathbb{P}[T] = 0.5$.
On the other hand, for any sequence $v in A$ denote $h(v)$ be the number of tails in $v$.
$$mathbb{P}[H] = sum_{v in H}mathbb{P}[v] = sum_{v in H} p^{h(v)}(1-p)^{n - h(v)} {hspace{2cm}} [1]$$
We need to make this $frac{1}{2}$.
Let $p = frac{r}{q}$ when fully reduced. Then
$$p^{h(v)}(1-p)^{n - h(v)} = frac{r^{h(v)}(q-r)^{n-h(v)}}{q^n}$$
Let's count how many times each possible value of $h(v)$ appears in the sum [1]:
Denote $c_k = |{v | v in H text{ and } h(v)=k }|$. Then [1] becomes
$$mathbb{P}[H] = sum_{k=0}^n c_k frac{r^{k}(q-r)^{n-k}}{q^n} =
frac{sum_{k=0}^n c_k r^{k}(q-r)^{n-k}}{q^n} = frac{1}{2}$$
An algorithm that works for all $p$ doesn't exist, because if $q$ is odd, there is no way to introduce a factor of $2$ in the denominator of this expression. The best we can do is, given a $p$, try to find an algorithm that works for that specific $p$, or determine that such doesn't exist.
Since there are $n choose k$ sequences of coin tosses with length $n$ and $k$ heads, we also need $c_k leq {n choose k}$.
If $q$ is even, and we have a solution to the following equation, satisfying the bounds on $c_k$
$$sum_{k=0}^n c_k r^{k}(q-r)^{n-k} = frac{q^n}{2}$$
Then we can simply include $c_k$ sequences containing $k$ heads in $H$ for each $k$ to get our algorithm.
Note that this equation has finitely many potential solutions, so we can simply try them all.
New contributor
edited Nov 16 at 14:55
New contributor
answered Nov 16 at 9:36
Todor Markov
3365
3365
New contributor
New contributor
1
The problem says $p$ is rational. I think you can modify your arguments to $mathbb{P}[H]$ has denominator of the form $q^m$, which is an odd number, where $p = frac{q'}{q}$, so there is a solution only when $p=frac{1}{2}$.
– Qidi
Nov 16 at 9:44
My bad I missed that. Thanks for the tip.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 10:17
You mean there are some $p$ for which there is no algorithm. For some $p$ it is possible, for instance $p=1/4$.
– Michal Adamaszek
Nov 16 at 10:57
@Michael Adamaszek Yes. The way I understand the problem, you don't actually know $p$ beforehand to be able to tune your algorithm to it. Indeed, both example algorithms shown in the first post work for any $p$ unaltered. But it is worth clarifying that.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:02
Updated answer to include the case when we want an algorithm for a specific $p$.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:44
|
show 1 more comment
1
The problem says $p$ is rational. I think you can modify your arguments to $mathbb{P}[H]$ has denominator of the form $q^m$, which is an odd number, where $p = frac{q'}{q}$, so there is a solution only when $p=frac{1}{2}$.
– Qidi
Nov 16 at 9:44
My bad I missed that. Thanks for the tip.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 10:17
You mean there are some $p$ for which there is no algorithm. For some $p$ it is possible, for instance $p=1/4$.
– Michal Adamaszek
Nov 16 at 10:57
@Michael Adamaszek Yes. The way I understand the problem, you don't actually know $p$ beforehand to be able to tune your algorithm to it. Indeed, both example algorithms shown in the first post work for any $p$ unaltered. But it is worth clarifying that.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:02
Updated answer to include the case when we want an algorithm for a specific $p$.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:44
1
1
The problem says $p$ is rational. I think you can modify your arguments to $mathbb{P}[H]$ has denominator of the form $q^m$, which is an odd number, where $p = frac{q'}{q}$, so there is a solution only when $p=frac{1}{2}$.
– Qidi
Nov 16 at 9:44
The problem says $p$ is rational. I think you can modify your arguments to $mathbb{P}[H]$ has denominator of the form $q^m$, which is an odd number, where $p = frac{q'}{q}$, so there is a solution only when $p=frac{1}{2}$.
– Qidi
Nov 16 at 9:44
My bad I missed that. Thanks for the tip.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 10:17
My bad I missed that. Thanks for the tip.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 10:17
You mean there are some $p$ for which there is no algorithm. For some $p$ it is possible, for instance $p=1/4$.
– Michal Adamaszek
Nov 16 at 10:57
You mean there are some $p$ for which there is no algorithm. For some $p$ it is possible, for instance $p=1/4$.
– Michal Adamaszek
Nov 16 at 10:57
@Michael Adamaszek Yes. The way I understand the problem, you don't actually know $p$ beforehand to be able to tune your algorithm to it. Indeed, both example algorithms shown in the first post work for any $p$ unaltered. But it is worth clarifying that.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:02
@Michael Adamaszek Yes. The way I understand the problem, you don't actually know $p$ beforehand to be able to tune your algorithm to it. Indeed, both example algorithms shown in the first post work for any $p$ unaltered. But it is worth clarifying that.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:02
Updated answer to include the case when we want an algorithm for a specific $p$.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:44
Updated answer to include the case when we want an algorithm for a specific $p$.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:44
|
show 1 more comment
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3000819%2fturning-a-biased-coin-into-an-unbiased-one-deterministically%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Do we know $p$ beforehand? Can the algorithm depend on $p$? There is no algorithm that works for all $p$, but for some values of $p$, such as $frac{1}{4}$ it is possible to have a deterministic algorithm.
– Todor Markov
Nov 16 at 11:04
1
Yes, we know $p$ beforehand, so we can take as much time as we need to pre-compute, say, a decision tree. I'll update this in the question.
– helper
Nov 16 at 14:44