Skip to main content

数学趣题:区分好人与坏人

问题:现有n个人,多于一半是好人,其余为坏人。你并不不知道他们具体谁是好人谁是坏人,然而他们彼此很清楚。
现在你每次可以挑两个人互相指认对方是好人还是坏人,好人总说实话,而坏人则会胡说(不一定是假话)。
请找到一个算法区分所有好人与坏人,并给出所需次数(大致数量级即可)

解答:(以下为大致阐述,对于细节,如是否严格大于或大于等于之类请自行讨论)
对于n较小的情况,如2,3,可以指定一个人T,让他与其余所有人互相指认,因为好人多于坏人,所以看结果是说T是好人的多还是坏人的多,那个多T就是哪个,如果一样多,T是好人。此时虽然是n平方数量级,但也可看作线性。

对n较大的情况,我们希望尽快找到一个好人以便指认出其余人的情况
把n个人两两分组(如有多余暂不考虑,放到下一轮处理),让他们互相指认。结果有如下几种情况:
a.至少一个人说对方是坏人
b.都说对方是好人

对于a, 组里至少一个人是坏人,我们把所有这样的组全部“淘汰”
对于b, 组里两个人必同为好人或同为坏人,我们在这样的组中每组任选一个淘汰。

这样一轮下来,可以知道淘汰掉的坏人不少于淘汰掉的好人,仔细分析还可知道剩下的人当中一定还是好人比坏人严格多。
这样下去直至剩下小于4人的情况,就可以用最开始的方法找到一个好人。
此时所花的次数约为N/2 + N/4 + ..., 大约等于N,然后再用至多N-1次指认就可以分辨所有好人与坏人了。

所以最后的数量级为2N

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Exploring Immutable Distros and Declarative Management

My current server setup, based on Debian Stable and Docker, has served me reliably for years. It's stable, familiar, and gets the job done. However, an intriguing article I revisited recently about Fedora CoreOS, rpm-ostree, and OSTree native containers sparked my curiosity and sent me down a rabbit hole exploring alternative approaches to system management. Could there be a better way? Core Goals & Requirements Before diving into new technologies, I wanted to define what "better" means for my use case: The base operating system must update automatically and reliably. Hosted services (applications) should be updatable either automatically or manually, depending on the service. Configuration and data files need to be easy to modify, and crucially, automatically tracked and backed up. Current Setup: Debian Stable + Docker My current infrastructure consists of several servers, all running Debian Stable. System Updates are andled automatically via unattended-upgrades. Se...

A Rocky Migration: Moving from docker-compose to Podman and gVisor

I've been running a few containers for several years. They were all running under rootless Docker with a single user. Initially, I planned to  migrate the containers to VMs , but I couldn't get a stable workflow after about two months of effort. Later,  gVisor caught my attention , and I decided to migrate to Podman with gVisor instead. The new plan is to run each container with  --userns=auto  and use Quadlet for systemd integration. This approach provides better isolation and makes writing firewall rules easier. I'm now close to migrating all my containers. Here are a couple of rough edges I'd like to share. Network Layout I compared  various networking options  and spent a few hours trying the one-interface-per-group approach before giving up. I settled on a single macvlan network and decided to use static IP addresses for my containers. To prevent a randomly assigned IP address from conflicting with a predefined one, I allocated a large IP range for my ...

Determine Perspective Lines With Off-page Vanishing Point

In perspective drawing, a vanishing point represents a group of parallel lines, in other words, a direction. For any point on the paper, if we want a line towards the same direction (in the 3d space), we simply draw a line through it and the vanishing point. But sometimes the vanishing point is too far away, such that it is outside the paper/canvas. In this example, we have a point P and two perspective lines L1 and L2. The vanishing point VP is naturally the intersection of L1 and L2. The task is to draw a line through P and VP, without having VP on the paper. I am aware of a few traditional solutions: 1. Use extra pieces of paper such that we can extend L1 and L2 until we see VP. 2. Draw everything in a smaller scale, such that we can see both P and VP on the paper. Draw the line and scale everything back. 3. Draw a perspective grid using the Brewer Method. #1 and #2 might be quite practical. #3 may not guarantee a solution, unless we can measure distances/p...