One hundred prisoners and a lightbulb

Dehaye, Paul-Olivier; Ford, Daniel; Segerman, Henry

doi:10.1007/bf02984862

Cited by 7 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This puzzle concerns 100 prisoners kept in solitary confinement [19]. One day the warden gathers all the prisoners in the dining hall for dinner and announces that from the following day he will randomly choose one prisoner every day for questioning.…”

Section: One Hundred Prisonersmentioning

confidence: 99%

MCMAS: an open-source model checker for the verification of multi-agent systems

Lomuscio

Raimondi

2015

Int J Softw Tools Technol Transfer

182

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present MCMAS, a model checker for the verification of multi-agent systems. MCMAS supports efficient symbolic techniques for the verification of multi-agent systems against specifications representing temporal, epistemic and strategic properties. We present the underlying semantics of the specification language supported and the algorithms implemented in MCMAS, including its fairness and counterexample generation features. We provide a detailed description of the implementation. We illustrate its use by discussing a number of examples and evaluate its performance by comparing it against other model checkers for multi-agent systems on a common case study.

show abstract

Section: One Hundred Prisonersmentioning

confidence: 99%

MCMAS: an open-source model checker for the verification of multi-agent systems

Lomuscio

Raimondi

2015

Int J Softw Tools Technol Transfer

182

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On an IBM Research 2002 website (IBM Research, 2002) a 23 prisoner version is given and it is mentioned that "this puzzle has been making the rounds of Hungarian mathematicians' parties". See also (Dehaye et al, 2003;Winkler, 2004;Wu, 2002) and http://wuriddles.com/.…”

Section: Originmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It was originally presented in (Wu, 2002;Dehaye et al, 2003). We can give different roles to different prisoners, and we can give different meanings to turning on or off the light on different days.…”

Section: Binary Tokens Protocolmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Protocol 4 was a recent addition. The authors of (Dehaye et al, 2003) mention generalizations to the computation of any Turing-computable function with n arguments by n prisoners communicating this way-termination is when a prisoner declares the output of the computation. There seems also an interesting relation between the prisoners riddle and the Wakeup Problem in the field of distributed computing (Fischer et al, 1996).…”

Section: Puzzlementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This has already been investigated with extensive simulations and trials, without a conclusive answer. Details are found in (Wu, 2002;Dehaye et al, 2003;van Ditmarsch et al, 2010).…”

Section: Computationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Verifying one hundred prisoners and a lightbulb

Ditmarsch

Eijck

2010

Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. This is a case-study in knowledge representation and dynamic epistemic protocol verification. We analyze the 'one hundred prisoners and a lightbulb' puzzle. In this puzzle it is relevant what the agents (prisoners) know, how their knowledge changes due to observations, and how they affect the state of the world by changing facts, i.e., by their actions. These actions depend on the history of previous actions and observations. Part of its interest is that all actions are local, i.e. not publicly observable, and part of the problem is therefore how to disseminate local results to other agents, and make them global. The various solutions to the puzzle are presented as protocols (iterated functions from agent's local states, and histories of actions, to actions). The paper consists of three parts. First, we present different versions of the puzzle, and their solutions. This includes a probabilistic version, and a version assuming synchronicity (the interval between prisoners' interrogations is known). The latter is very informative for the prisoners, and allows different protocols (with faster expected termination). Then, we model the puzzle in an epistemic logic incorporating dynamic operators for the effects of information changing events. Such events include both informative actions, where agents become more informed about the non-changing state of the world, and factual changes, wherein the world and the facts describing it change themselves as well. Finally, we verify the basic protocol to solve the problem. Novel contributions in this paper are: Firstly, Protocol 2 and Protocol 4. Secondly, the modelling in dynamic epistemic logic in its entirety -we do not know of a case study that combines

show abstract