|
ko20010214
版主
积分 7294
发帖 1628
注册 2002-10-16
状态 离线
|
『楼 主』:
趣味推理题－－国王与囚犯[转帖]
使用 LLM 解释/回答一下
国王要处决一个囚犯，但给他一个生还的机会。
囚犯被带到5扇紧闭的门前，其中一扇后面关着一只老虎。
国王对囚犯说：“你必须依次打开这些门。我可以肯定
的是，在你没有打开关着老虎的那扇门之前，你是无法
知道老虎是在那扇门后。”
开门之前，囚犯进行了如下分析：
1。假设老虎在第5扇门后，则在我打开前4扇门后就已经
知道老虎在第5扇门后，这于国王的话矛盾。
＝> 老虎只能在前4扇门后。
2。假设老虎在第4扇门后，则在我打开前3扇门后就已经
知道老虎在第4扇门后，这于国王的话矛盾。
＝> 老虎只能在前3扇门后。
3。依次类推.
＝>没有老虎！
囚犯认为国王是在吓唬他，根本就没有老虎。于是他放心
的去开门。但当他打开第2扇门时，老虎跳出来把他吃了。
囚犯的推理似乎很严密。但国王的话似乎也没错：囚犯
在打开第2扇门之前的确不知道老虎就在第2扇门后。
究竟是怎么回事？
The king wants to execute a prisoner but gives him a chance to survive.
The prisoner is led to 5 closed doors, and one of them has a tiger behind it.
The king says to the prisoner: "You must open these doors in sequence. I can be certain that you won't know where the tiger is until you open the door that has the tiger behind it."
Before opening the doors, the prisoner made the following analysis:
1. Suppose the tiger is behind the 5th door, then after I open the first 4 doors, I will already know that the tiger is behind the 5th door, which contradicts the king's words.
=> The tiger can only be behind the first 4 doors.
2. Suppose the tiger is behind the 4th door, then after I open the first 3 doors, I will already know that the tiger is behind the 4th door, which contradicts the king's words.
=> The tiger can only be behind the first 3 doors.
3. By analogy.
=> There is no tiger!
The prisoner thought the king was scaring him and there was no tiger at all. So he confidently went to open the doors. But when he opened the 2nd door, the tiger jumped out and ate him.
The prisoner's reasoning seemed very rigorous. But the king's words also seemed correct: the prisoner really didn't know that the tiger was behind the 2nd door before opening it.
What on earth is going on?
|
ko20010214
=================================
大功告成，打个Kiss!
ko20010214@MSN.com
神州优雅Q300C
Intel CeleronM 370处理器 | 256MbDDR内存
40G硬盘 | USB2.0 | IEEE 1394
13.3 ' WXGA 宽屏(16:10) | COMBO光驱
10/100M网卡 | 四合一读卡器
|
|
 2003-6-15 00:00 |
|
|
西西
初级用户
积分 283
发帖 87
注册 2003-6-7
状态 离线
|
|
|
2003-6-15 00:00 |
|
|
ko20010214
版主
积分 7294
发帖 1628
注册 2002-10-16
状态 离线
|
『第 3 楼』:
使用 LLM 解释/回答一下
这个不算长吧？呵呵。。。
有想出来的没有？？？
This isn't too long, right? Hehe... Is there anyone who has figured it out???
|
ko20010214
=================================
大功告成，打个Kiss!
ko20010214@MSN.com
神州优雅Q300C
Intel CeleronM 370处理器 | 256MbDDR内存
40G硬盘 | USB2.0 | IEEE 1394
13.3 ' WXGA 宽屏(16:10) | COMBO光驱
10/100M网卡 | 四合一读卡器
|
|
|
2003-6-15 00:00 |
|
|
Dark-Destroy
元老会员
积分 8312
发帖 3551
注册 2003-3-22
状态 离线
|
『第 4 楼』:
使用 LLM 解释/回答一下
呵,我想是每扇門都有老虎吧!!
Heh, I guess every door has its own tiger!!
|
MSN：tiqit2@hotmail.com
 |
|
|
2003-6-16 00:00 |
|
|
yiyesong
元老会员
积分 1987
发帖 632
注册 2002-10-27
状态 离线
|
『第 5 楼』:
使用 LLM 解释/回答一下
他忘了一条件，就是五扇门都没有老虎的情况，他的推理是在有老虎的情况下进行的，而他最终的实施却是加了这个条件，所以从他的第一个推理开始就是错误的。就算前l四扇门都没有老虎，他也不能判断第五扇门里有没有老虎。
He forgot one condition, that is, the situation where there are no tigers behind all five doors. His reasoning was carried out under the condition that there were tigers, but his final implementation added this condition, so his first reasoning was wrong from the beginning. Even if there are no tigers behind the first four doors, he can't judge whether there is a tiger behind the fifth door.
|
http://dos.e-stone.cn/dosbbs
uploadImages/200311161145850422.swf
|
|
|
2003-6-16 00:00 |
|
|
Dark-Destroy
元老会员
积分 8312
发帖 3551
注册 2003-3-22
状态 离线
|
『第 6 楼』:
使用 LLM 解释/回答一下
但是國王說一定有老虎呀~
囚犯第一個推理有錯嗎??他是假設老虎在第五扇,但國王又說老虎只能在前四扇門,
只要囚犯假設一個門後有老虎,國王又說一定在他假設那個門的前面那些門,所以囚犯最後的結論也沒有錯~~
但最後他開第二扇門時,老虎出來了,所以應該是每扇門後都有
But the king said there must be a tiger~
Did the prisoner's first reasoning have a mistake?? He assumed the tiger was behind the fifth door, but the king said the tiger could only be behind the first four doors.
As long as the prisoner assumes a tiger is behind a door, the king said it must be behind one of the doors in front of the one he assumed. So the prisoner's final conclusion was also not wrong~~
But when he opened the second door, the tiger came out, so it should be that there is a tiger behind each door
|
MSN：tiqit2@hotmail.com
|
|
|
2003-6-16 00:00 |
|
|
yiyesong
元老会员
积分 1987
发帖 632
注册 2002-10-27
状态 离线
|
『第 7 楼』:
使用 LLM 解释/回答一下
DD，你没看清题。老虎就只一只。因为囚犯得到的答案是在他推理过程中没有考虑到的。也就是说他认为没有老虎，事实上他承认了这个条件，但是在他推理的时候却又没有考虑这个条件，因此他整个推理都是错误的。
你说的每扇门都有老虎更不可能，因为他是被第二扇门的老虎吃的。题目已经说了第一扇门没有老虎。
DD, you didn't read the question clearly. There is only one tiger. Because the prisoner's answer is something that wasn't considered in his reasoning process. That is to say, he thought there was no tiger, in fact he admitted this condition, but he didn't consider this condition when reasoning, so his whole reasoning was wrong. What you said that there is a tiger behind each door is even less possible, because he was eaten by the tiger behind the second door. The question has said that there is no tiger behind the first door.
|
http://dos.e-stone.cn/dosbbs
uploadImages/200311161145850422.swf
|
|
|
2003-6-16 00:00 |
|
|
Dark-Destroy
元老会员
积分 8312
发帖 3551
注册 2003-3-22
状态 离线
|
『第 8 楼』:
使用 LLM 解释/回答一下
怪了,題目有說第一扇門沒有老虎嗎??
如果是因為他是在第二扇門被吃掉而說第一扇門沒有老虎的話,那也不對呀!!應該是後面的門都沒有老虎吧~~那答案不就有了嗎??那何必在問呢~
沒錯,囚犯在推理時確實沒把"沒有老虎"這個條件也算進去,但國王一開始就說一定有老虎,所以囚犯才會把"沒有老虎"這個條件沒算進去~
且囚犯也沒有一開始就認為"沒有老虎"吧~
Strange, does the question say that there is no tiger behind the first door??
If it's because he was eaten behind the second door and then saying there's no tiger behind the first door, that's not right either!! It should be that there are no tigers behind the subsequent doors~~ Then the answer would be clear~~ So why ask??
Yes, the prisoner indeed didn't include the condition of "no tiger" in the reasoning, but the king said there must be a tiger at the beginning, so the prisoner didn't include the "no tiger" condition~~
And the prisoner didn't think there was "no tiger" at the beginning either~
|
MSN：tiqit2@hotmail.com
|
|
|
2003-6-16 00:00 |
|
|
szwy
初级用户
积分 129
发帖 10
注册 2002-11-17
状态 离线
|
『第 9 楼』:
使用 LLM 解释/回答一下
怎么才能和你说清楚呢？这样说吧，囚犯得出的结论是没有老虎，但是正是因为结论是没有老虎，所以它前面的推理就站不脚了，因为它的推理是按照有老虎的情况而推下去的，也就是他的推理必须是有老虎才能成立，而得出的结论一定不能是没有老虎，否则的话，如果他承认没有老虎，有老虎的条件就不成立，整个推理也就完全不成立了。事实上，这个无老虎的结论既是结论也是条件。所以他还要接下去推。
囚犯应该这样推：
1。假设老虎在第5扇门后，则在我打开前4扇门后就已经
知道老虎在第5扇门后，这于国王的话矛盾。
＝> 老虎只能在前4扇门后。
2。假设老虎在第4扇门后，则在我打开前3扇门后就已经
知道老虎在第4扇门后，这于国王的话矛盾。
＝> 老虎只能在前3扇门后。
3。依次类推.
＝>没有老虎！
4。没有老虎。
但是假如国王把老虎摆在第一扇门内，因为我的结论是没有老虎，所以我不知道有老虎。
假如国王把老虎摆在第二扇门内，因为我的结论是没有老虎，所以我也不知道有老虎。
。。。。。。
依次类推
国王把老虎摆在任何一扇门，囚犯在打开之前，都无法知道里面有老虎，所以囚犯必死无疑。
从另外一个角度说，这个推理实际上是个死循环，也就是有老虎—无老虎—有老虎—。。。
即条件—结论（条件）—结论（条件）—。。。
所以最终结论就是无法推理，囚犯等死。
How can I make it clear to you? Let's put it this way. The prisoner's conclusion is that there is no tiger, but precisely because the conclusion is no tiger, then his previous reasoning can't hold water, because his reasoning is deduced according to the situation of there being a tiger, that is, his reasoning must be valid only if there is a tiger, and the conclusion must not be no tiger. Otherwise, if he admits there is no tiger, the condition of there being a tiger is not established, and the whole reasoning is completely invalid. In fact, this conclusion of no tiger is both a conclusion and a condition. So he has to continue reasoning.
The prisoner should reason like this:
1. Assume the tiger is behind the 5th door, then after I open the first 4 doors, I will already know the tiger is behind the 5th door, which contradicts the king's words.
=> The tiger can only be behind the first 4 doors.
2. Assume the tiger is behind the 4th door, then after I open the first 3 doors, I will already know the tiger is behind the 4th door, which contradicts the king's words.
=> The tiger can only be behind the first 3 doors.
3. By analogy.
=> There is no tiger!
4. There is no tiger.
But if the king puts the tiger in the first door, because my conclusion is no tiger, so I don't know there is a tiger.
If the king puts the tiger in the second door, because my conclusion is no tiger, so I also don't know there is a tiger.
......
By analogy
The king puts the tiger in any door, the prisoner can't know there is a tiger before opening it, so the prisoner is doomed to die.
From another perspective, this reasoning is actually a vicious circle, that is, there is a tiger - no tiger - there is a tiger -...
That is, condition - conclusion (condition) - conclusion (condition) -...
So the final conclusion is that there is no way to reason, and the prisoner waits to die.
|
|
|
2003-6-16 00:00 |
|
|
boyachang
初级用户
积分 195
发帖 35
注册 2003-4-17
状态 离线
|
『第 10 楼』:
使用 LLM 解释/回答一下
推理时假设前面没有老虎，这个本身就有问题。
因为前面一定有老虎，而且老虎可能把囚犯吃掉，就没有后面的确定了。
Assuming there are no tigers ahead during reasoning is problematic in itself. Because there must be a tiger ahead, and if the tiger eats the prisoner, there won't be the subsequent certainty.
|
|
|
2003-6-16 00:00 |
|
|
Dark-Destroy
元老会员
积分 8312
发帖 3551
注册 2003-3-22
状态 离线
|
『第 11 楼』:
使用 LLM 解释/回答一下
國王的那句話〝你必须依次打开这些门。我可以肯定的是，在你没有打开关着老虎的那扇门之前，你是无法知道老虎是在那扇门后。”就會讓人朝一定有老虎的方向想~~
且一開始沒有人會以"沒有老虎"來想的吧~~
The king's words "You must open these doors in sequence. I can be sure that you won't know where the tiger is behind until you open the door that has the tiger closed." will make people think in the direction that there must be a tiger~~
And at the beginning, no one would think with "there is no tiger" right?
|
MSN：tiqit2@hotmail.com
|
|
|
2003-6-16 00:00 |
|
|
yiyesong
元老会员
积分 1987
发帖 632
注册 2002-10-27
状态 离线
|
『第 12 楼』:
使用 LLM 解释/回答一下
开始他的推理没有错，而是说这个推理本身就是矛盾的，你还不明白呀，就是有老虎的条件和没老虎的结论是相矛盾的。正是有了没有老虎的结论，他前面有老虎的条件就被推翻了，所以整个推理也就被推翻了。我觉得我说的够清楚了。
KO，你也不出来公布一下答案，光我们在这儿瞎争论。
His reasoning was not wrong at first, but rather that the reasoning itself is contradictory. Don't you understand? It's that the condition of having a tiger and the conclusion of not having a tiger are contradictory. It's precisely because of the conclusion of not having a tiger that the previous condition of having a tiger is overthrown, so the entire reasoning is overthrown. I think what I said is clear enough.
KO, you don't come out to announce the answer, just us arguing here aimlessly.
|
http://dos.e-stone.cn/dosbbs
uploadImages/200311161145850422.swf
|
|
|
2003-6-16 00:00 |
|
|
如是大师
元老会员
步行的人
积分 9654
发帖 3351
注册 2003-3-11
来自 湖北
状态 离线
|
『第 13 楼』:
使用 LLM 解释/回答一下
yiyesong厉害呀。。把我的都说了。。。
叫我还看个什么劲。。
yiyesong is powerful. He said everything I wanted to say. Then what else should I read for?
|
弄花香满衣，掬水月在手。
明月鹭鸟飞， 芦花白马走。
我自一过后，野渡现横舟。
青云碧空在，净瓶水不流。
http://dos.e-stone.cn/guestbook/index.asp
＝＝＝＝＝＝中國DOS聯盟＝＝＝＝＝
我的新网页http://rsds.7i24.com欢迎光顾 |
|
|
2003-6-17 00:00 |
|
|
ko20010214
版主
积分 7294
发帖 1628
注册 2002-10-16
状态 离线
|
『第 14 楼』:
使用 LLM 解释/回答一下
這個問題就是爭論才好玩呢。
This issue is fun just because of the debate.
|
ko20010214
=================================
大功告成，打个Kiss!
ko20010214@MSN.com
神州优雅Q300C
Intel CeleronM 370处理器 | 256MbDDR内存
40G硬盘 | USB2.0 | IEEE 1394
13.3 ' WXGA 宽屏(16:10) | COMBO光驱
10/100M网卡 | 四合一读卡器
|
|
|
2003-6-17 00:00 |
|
|
Dark-Destroy
元老会员
积分 8312
发帖 3551
注册 2003-3-22
状态 离线
|
『第 15 楼』:
使用 LLM 解释/回答一下
暈...原本是辯論題呀~~
Dizzy... Originally it was a debate topic~~
|
MSN：tiqit2@hotmail.com
|
|
|
2003-6-18 00:00 |
|
