found a nice article on PLOS about the positive effect of Meditation on attention (surely relevant to highspeed tetris gameplay) Mental Training Affects Distribution of Limited Brain Resources abstract: Our sensory system is constantly bombarded with inputs, but owing to the brains fi nite processing power, we are forced to pay attention to only a tiny proportion of these inputs at any given time. In a new study, Richard Davidson and colleagues report that intensive training in meditation can alter the way in which the brain allocates attentional resources to important stimuli, allowing people to improve their performance on a demanding visual task. article url: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picren ... obtype=pdf easier to read Synopses: http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlser ... 0166-S.pdf any other nice readings known? lets collect here in this thread?
Maybe it's just since I'm the freak who goes for complexity theory and such, but check caffeine's link and check the abstract for "Tetris is Hard, Even to Approximate". One thing everybody should know (the coolest result): Tetris is NOT in P.
That article is behind a pay wall. The preprint is free. The NP-completeness proof assumes the memoryless randomizer. One of the required piece subsequences assumes three J's in a 4-piece subsequence; this can occur in memoryless but not in bag, and it is next to impossible in history. (In fact, standard low-G Tetris with bag+hold has what the paper calls a perpetual loss-avoiding strategy.) I wrote more detail about this paper in this topic from about a year ago.
I don't think I could possibly find the link, but I quite liked reading about how people with anterograde amnesia can still learn how to play tetris. It's crazy... If they were never exposed to tetris before their amnesia, then they will actually think it's the first time they play every time. Yet they will still improve with each new session. In regards to NP-completeness and randomizers: technically TGM randomizers include all the same sequences that pure random generates, so I think the NP-completeness would still hold. That's assuming perfect randomization though. I wonder if it still holds with the pseudo-random finite looping sequences that are actually implemented in the games? What kind of knowledge would I need to read and understand that article, by the way? I've always wanted to read it, but I don't have a background in computer science and have yet to attempt a read.
Technically true, but in practice, the only commercial games that use a history randomizer stop the player after about 360 or 720 or 940 pieces (that's the 500 point, 999 point, and 1300 point). It depends. Someone will have to run the game through all of the estimated 7^4 * 2^32 = 10.3 trillion states of the randomizer. (7^4 is the current history, and 2^32 is the LCG state.) Tell me the first word you don't understand in the preprint and I'll help you clear it.
Three points: 1) Ok, "preprint". 2) Eh, I see the bag randomizer as being in the same category as infinite rotation. In other words, screw that. 3) It is possible in history, just improbable; that's enough to keep the NP status. Of course, ct already said that one. As for finite games...I'm pretty sure that those are already out the window when considering complexity in this sense. After all, if all of the variables are set in the first place, there's no variable to say that the complexity is non-polynomial with respect to.
is anyone else having trouble opening the pdf's that herc linked to? i thought my adobe was up to date, but firefox is crashing. it works in multiplayer, except at the start of the game when predictable setups are possible.
Then remove the Adobe Reader plug-in from Firefox's plug-ins folder. This will force Firefox to open PDFs in a new window. Or uninstall Adobe Reader entirely and try Foxit Reader.
