arXiv++ Combinatorics

In an impartial combinatorial game, both players have the same options in the game and all its subpositions. The classical Sprague-Grundy Theory was developed for short impartial games, where players have a finite number of options, there are no special moves, and an infinite run is not possible. Subsequently, many generalizations have been proposed, particularly the Smith-Frankel-Perl Theory devised for games where the infinite run is possible, and the Larsson-Nowakowski-Santos Theory able to deal with entailing moves that disrupt the logic of the disjunctive sum. This work presents a generalization that combines these two theories, suitable for analyzing cyclic impartial games with carry-on moves, which are particular cases of entailing moves where the entailed player has no freedom of choice in their response. This generalization is illustrated with sc green-lime hackenbush, a game inspired by the classic green hackenbush.

There are many combinatorial games in which a move can terminate the game, such as a checkmate in chess. These moves give rise to diverse situations that fall outside the scope of the classical normal play structure. To analyze these games, an algebraic extension is necessary, including infinities as elements. In this work, affine normal play, the algebraic structure resulting from that extension, is analyzed. We prove that it is possible to compare two affine games using only their forms. Furthermore, affine games can still be reduced, although the reduced forms are not unique. We establish that the classical normal play is order-embedded in the extended structure, constituting its substructure of invertible elements. Additionally, as in classical theory, affine games born by day n form a lattice with respect to the partial order of games.

The class of Poset Take-Away games includes many interesting and difficult games. Playing on an $n$-dimensional positive quadrant (the origin being the bottom of the poset) gives rise to nim, wythoff's nim and chomp. These are impartial games. We introduce a partisan game motivated by chomp and the recent chocolate-bar version. Our game is played on a chocolate bar with alternately flavored pieces (or a checkerboard). We solve this game by showing it is equivalent to blue-red hackenbush strings. This equivalence proves that the values of game are numbers and it gives an algorithm for optimal play when there is more than one chocolate bar. The checkerboard interpretation leads to many natural questions.

In Combinatorial Game Theory, short game forms are defined recursively over all the positions the two players are allowed to move to. A form is decomposable if it can be expressed as a disjunctive sum of two forms with smaller birthday. If there are no such summands, then the form is indecomposable. The main contribution of this document is the characterization of the indecomposable nimbers and the characterization of the indecomposable numbers. More precisely, a nimber is indecomposable if and only if its size is a power of two, and a number is indecomposable if and only if its absolute value is less or equal than one.

Combinatorial Game Theory typically studies sequential rulesets with perfect information where two players alternate moves. There are rulesets with {\em entailing moves} that break the alternating play axiom and/or restrict the other player's options within the disjunctive sum components. Although some examples have been analyzed in the classical work Winning Ways, such rulesets usually fall outside the scope of the established normal play mathematical theory. At the first Combinatorial Games Workshop at MSRI, John H. Conway proposed that an effort should be made to devise some nontrivial ruleset with entailing moves that had a complete analysis. Recently, Larsson, Nowakowski, and Santos proposed a more general theory, {\em affine impartial}, which facilitates the mathematical analysis of impartial rulesets with entailing moves. Here, by using this theory, we present a complete solution for a nontrivial ruleset with entailing moves.

Combinatorial Game Theory has also been called `additive game theory', whenever the analysis involves sums of independent game components. Such {\em disjunctive sums} invoke comparison between games, which allows abstract values to be assigned to them. However, there are rulesets with {\em entailing moves} that break the alternating play axiom and/or restrict the other player's options within the disjunctive sum components. These situations are exemplified in the literature by a ruleset such as {\sc nimstring}, a normal play variation of the classical children's game {\sc dots \& boxes}, and {\sc top~entails}, an elegant ruleset introduced in the classical work Winning Ways, by Berlekamp Conway and Guy. Such rulesets fall outside the scope of the established normal play theory. Here, we axiomatize normal play via two new terminating games, $\infty$ (Left wins) and $\overline\infty$ (Right wins), and a more general theory is achieved. We define {\em affine impartial}, which extends classical impartial games, and we analyze their algebra by extending the established Sprague-Grundy theory, with an accompanying minimum excluded rule. Solutions of {\sc nimstring} and {\sc top~entails} are given to illustrate the theory.

Absolute Universes of combinatorial games, as defined in a recent paper by the same authors, include many standard short normal- misère- and scoring-play monoids. In this note we show that the class is categorical, by extending Joyal's construction of arrows in normal-play games. Given $G$ and $H$ in an Absolute Universe $U$, we study instead the Left Provisonal Game $[G, H]$, which is a normal-play game, independently of the particular Absolute Universe, and find that $G\longrightarrow H$ (implying $G\succcurlyeq H$) corresponds to the set of winning strategies for Left playing second in $[G,H]$. By this we define the category ${\bf LNP(U)}$.

We propose a unifying additive theory for standard conventions in Combinatorial Game Theory, including normal-, misère- and scoring-play, studied by Berlekamp, Conway, Dorbec, Ettinger, Guy, Larsson, Milley, Neto, Nowakowski, Renault, Santos, Siegel, Sopena, Stewart (1976-2019), and others. A game {\em universe} is a set of games that satisfies some standard closure properties. Here, we reveal when the fundamental game comparison problem, ``Is $G\su H$?'', simplifies to a constructive `local' solution, which generalizes Conway's foundational result in ONAG (1976) for normal-play games. This happens in a broad and general fashion whenever a given game universe is {\em absolute}. Games in an absolute universe satisfy two properties, dubbed {\em parentality} and {\em saturation}, and we prove that the latter is implied by the former. Parentality means that any pair of non-empty finite sets of games is admissible as options, and saturation means that, given any game, the first player can be favored in a disjunctive sum. Game comparison is at the core of combinatorial game theory, and for example efficiency of potential reduction theorems rely on a local comparison. We distinguish between three levels of game comparison; superordinate (global), basic (semi-constructive) and subordinate (local) comparison. In proofs, a sometimes tedious challenge faces a researcher in CGT: in order to disprove an inequality, an explicit distinguishing game might be required. Here, we explain how this job becomes obsolete whenever a universe is absolute. Namely, it suffices to see if a pair of games satisfies a certain Proviso together with a Maintenance of an inequality.

The class of Guaranteed Scoring Games (GS) are two-player combinatorial games with the property that Normal-play games (Conway et. al.) are ordered embedded into GS. They include, as subclasses, the scoring games considered by Milnor (1953), Ettinger (1996) and Johnson (2014). We present the structure of GS and the techniques needed to analyze a sum of guaranteed games. Firstly, GS form a partially ordered monoid, via defined Right- and Left-stops over the reals, and with disjunctive sum as the operation. In fact, the structure is a quotient monoid with partially ordered congruence classes. We show that there are four reductions that when applied, in any order, give a unique representative for each congruence class. The monoid is not a group, but in this paper we prove that if a game has an inverse it is obtained by `switching the players'. The order relation between two games is defined by comparing their stops in \textit{any} disjunctive sum. Here, we demonstrate how to compare the games via a finite algorithm instead, extending ideas of Ettinger, and also Siegel (2013).

Combinatorial Scoring games, with the property `extra pass moves for a player does no harm', are characterized. The characterization involves an order embedding of Conway's Normal-play games. Also, we give a theorem for comparing games with scores (numbers) which extends Ettinger's work on dicot Scoring games.