>>495
>Denisの以下の発言
>”yes but the point is that we can win again any strategy of the opponent, even if he chooses the sequence after we chose our (probabilistic) strategy. This way we avoid talking about probabilities on sequences.”
>特に、最初の文章の”avoid”
まったく根拠になってないですね。

Denisがavoidしたかったのは下の引用のようにPrussがprobabilities on sequencesに言及していたためです。
But we have no reason to think the event of guessing correctly is measurable with respect to the probability measure induced by the random choice of sequence and index i

実際、Denisは
ok this helps, but when you say "suppose u is chosen randomly",this is where the problem arises. Isn't there a way to ask the riddle so that the notion of probability of victory makes sense, without encountering this problem (for instance agains an opponent who chooses the sequence).
と、出題列がランダム選択されると述べた時に問題が持ち上がると述べており、このことからも
>Denisが
>「固定の配列で成り立つから、ランダムに選択された配列でも成り立つ」
>と考えていたと思われる
は否定できると思います。