Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1906.12314

The Winnability of Klondike Solitaire and Many Other Patience Games

Charlie Blake·Ian P. Gent
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Our ignorance of the winnability percentage of the solitaire card game `Klondike' has been described as ``one of the embarrassments of applied mathematics''. Klondike, the game in the Windows Solitaire program, is just one of many single-player card games, generically called `patience' or `solitaire' games, for which players have long wanted to know how likely a particular game is to be winnable. A number of different games have been studied empirically in the academic literature and by non-academic enthusiasts. Here we show that a single general purpose Artificial Intelligence program named `Solvitaire' can be used to determine the winnability percentage of 73 variants of 35 different single-player card games with a 95% confidence interval of $\pm$ 0.1% or better. For example, we report the winnability of Klondike as 81.945% $\pm$ 0.084% (in the `thoughtful' variant where the player knows the rank and suit of all cards), a 30-fold reduction in confidence interval over the best previous result. The vast majority of our results are either entirely new or represent significant improvements on previous knowledge. Solvitaire uses depth-first search and exploits a number of AI techniques including transposition tables, symmetry breaking, dominances, and streamliners. We give the first correctness proofs of two key dominances for patience games.

Explore related subjects

cs.AI

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Charlie Blake, Ian P. Gent. 2019-06-28. The Winnability of Klondike Solitaire and Many Other Patience Games. https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.1.17167

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI↗