Stone Scissors cloth Strategy controversial opponents think conclusion far-fetched

In recent days, a Chinese scientists have made a study of scissors and stone cloth strategy to cause a lot of netizens hot discussion, many people ridicule did not help, but also some doubt the value of the study. Research authors in the paper said that the findings of the winners stay, the loser's strategy can lead to more human decision-making model research, while the researchers did not participate in the paper, the researchers affirmed the direction of the study of scissors and stone from the human cognitive perspective, but did not endorse the conclusions of the study. The researchers gave the winning strategy. The research on the strategy of scissors and stone cloth was done by researchers from Zhejiang University, Zhejiang Business University and Institute of Theoretical Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. According to the research paper, players tend to use the last-round winning strategy, which leads to a lost strategy, and players tend to replace them in the next round. For example, a person in the last round of the game out of the stone win, the next round will tend to use stone, and if the stone lost, the next round may choose to change cloth or scissors. Also gave the scissors stone cloth winning strategy: If your opponent has beaten you with a stone in the first round, you can choose to use cloth for this round, and if your opponent loses a stone in the first round, then you can give a restraining order against the scissors or cloth that may come out of the round. Or to achieve higher social benefits the paper is now open in the open paper publishing platform. It is noteworthy that the publication of this platform does not mean that the paper has been published in international academic journals, and that it still requires rigorous peer review before it can be formally published. Research paper author, Institute of Theoretical Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences researcher Zhou Haijun declined the reporter's interview, he said the study is in the peer review process, according to academic practice, can not be interviewed. According to the papers it publishes, the researchers say that the empirical research shows that the collective behavior of human beings is in conflict with pure mathematical theory such as Nash equilibrium, and that the new strategy may give players more chances to win than Nash equilibrium strategy and can achieve higher social benefits. The researchers also said in their paper that they hope their work will inspire more follow-up research in human decision-making and learning abilities. Point of view 1 can improve the odds many netizens try to use this strategy to play scissors stone cloth, but found no help, but also netizens questioned why scientists should study the scissors stone cloth, some netizens even think, this is the scientists idle egg pain. John Steinberg, a foreign associate professor at the Institute of Interdisciplinary Information at Tsinghua University, says this is not a groundbreaking study, but its content is interesting and valuable in itself. If you're playing with scissors and stone cloth, opponents are smart, and it seems that the only thing you can do is give the scissors, stones and cloth one-third of the chance, he said, according to the content of the study, if most people's model is unchanged, then use the researcher's strategy can improve their chances of winning. Of course, once your opponent knows the strategy, it's completely ineffective. He said. 2 models are problematic a professor, who declined to be named, said the study was more a study of human behavior and mental inertia, only in the humanThe mathematical model can be introduced when the factors are clear. The behavior and style of people everywhere are different, and men and women are likely to be different. It says, from the scissors stone cloth to study the game theory and so on, the research idea is OK, but the key is, if establishes a mathematical model, needs the human habit, the psychology and so on various subjective factor reasonably to include in the mathematical model, can carry on the discussion. In his view, from the current research content, its mathematical model does not completely exclude people's independent factors. People can not be as cold-blooded as a robot, the human mind is independent, complex, he said, even if there is such a strategy, why is the other side of wood? People will also take countermeasures. 3 Judging unfairness a game theory and human Behavior Research analyst Niels Fille said that game theory is a very important research, and the main problem that needs to be broken is how to judge how cognitive biases affect people's decision-making. The hypothesis of the study, he said, was no problem, as people were playing with scissors and rock cloth with cognitive biases-often repeating strategies they had won. And from the perspective of research, cognitive biases are valuable and meaningful, and their significance is not only in the scissors and stone, but in the wider human behavior, in addition to the scissors and stone cloth, smart market people use cognitive biases to influence consumer behavior, or manipulate people's feelings. But, in his view, the hypothesis of the study is not a problem, but the study itself does not well verify the hypothesis, the conclusion is a little far-fetched, based on unfair and not practical judgments. (Reporter Jin)