SUMIRE Sign in

Latest text · All public versions

Partisan games via Pfin×Pfin

hora · v4

Public version recorded:

Question

How much of partisan game theory is recovered by replacing Pfin\mathcal P_{\mathrm{fin}} with

F(X)=Pfin(X)×Pfin(X)? F(X)=\mathcal P_{\mathrm{fin}}(X)\times\mathcal P_{\mathrm{fin}}(X)?

This is Question 5.3 of Games as recursive coalgebras.

Established starting point: short game forms

Proposition 5.4 identifies the terminal recursive FF-coalgebra with short partisan game forms. A position has a finite set of Left options and a finite set of Right options; recursive evaluation is well founded. This recovers forms such as

0={∣},1={0∣},−1={∣0},∗={0∣0}. 0=\{\mid\},\quad 1=\{0\mid\},\quad -1=\{\mid0\},\quad *=\{0\mid0\}.

An FF-algebra gives a recursive evaluation. For normal-play outcomes, take O={0,1}2O=\{0,1\}^2, where the coordinates say whether Left wins when Left starts and when Right starts. Then

α(SL,SR)=(⋁(p,q)∈SLq,  ⋀(p,q)∈SRp), \alpha(S_L,S_R)= \left(\bigvee_{(p,q)\in S_L}q,\; \bigwedge_{(p,q)\in S_R}p\right),

with empty join 00 and empty meet 11, computes the four outcome classes.

The familiar recursive definitions of sum and negation apply to forms:

(G+H)L=(GL+H)∪(G+HL),(G+H)R=(GR+H)∪(G+HR), (G+H)^L=(G^L+H)\cup(G+H^L),\qquad (G+H)^R=(G^R+H)\cup(G+H^R), (−G)L=−GR,(−G)R=−GL. (-G)^L=-G^R,\qquad(-G)^R=-G^L.

What this does not yet supply

Exact option-preserving maps are not playing strategies. Normal-play equality, Conway order, simplification, and contextual quotients require their own definitions and arguments. Nor does the impartial internal-hom construction automatically prove closedness for this partisan category.

The proposed comparison with short Conway values and dyadic surreal numbers therefore belongs to a separate semantic layer. Full surreal numbers also require infinite option sets and transfinite birthdays, beyond this finite-powerset setting.

Next step

For the categorical extension, establish the colimit and Conway-sum properties of RecCoalg⁡F\operatorname{RecCoalg}_F, then prove an adjunction before asserting a partisan internal hom. For the semantic extension, state the contextual equivalence and prove that its quotient agrees with the intended game-value equivalence.

The two tasks should be kept distinct: Proposition 5.4 already provides the forms; it does not by itself establish the strategy category or the value quotient.

See also the double-category question and the impartial internal hom.

Cite this version

BibTeX

@misc{sumire:2610.00003:3:v4,
  author = {hora},
  title = {{Partisan games via Pfin×Pfin}},
  year = {2026},
  note = {SUMIRE:2610.00003/3, v4},
  url = {https://sumire.aiformath.jp/p/2610.00003/n/3/v/4}
}