Riddler - Solutions to "Pick A Number, Any Number": low_numbers.csv
Data license: CC Attribution 4.0 License · Data source: fivethirtyeight/data on GitHub · About: simonw/fivethirtyeight-datasette
3,660 rows
This data as json, copyable, CSV (advanced)
Link | rowid ▼ | Your Number | Show Your Work |
---|---|---|---|
201 | 201 | 2 | I assume that someone is submitting 1. |
202 | 202 | 2 | I chose Two, "2" because it is the lowest positive integer which is not 1. My first instinct was to pick a number in the 1000s range at random because I surmised that all the low numbers would be taken. However the other players in the "game" would likely make the same decision so I decided to choose a low number and hope that it would be unique and lower than the "instinct" population. Then I guessed that there would also be a "clever" population of people that would take the same route I had chosen and pick number one - 1. Therefore to avoid the "instinct" and "clever" populations I have chosen the number two - 2. |
203 | 203 | 2 | Several people will try to sneak the quick 1 in there - but after that who'd pick 2? Seems like the number I would least want to select. Ergo: my pick. |
204 | 204 | 2 | I'm assuming some people will choose one, but of the people who don't choose one, they will all pick something significantly more than one. |
205 | 205 | 2 | Someone will put 1, others will try to think of a number people won't think of, and my thought is it will be higher than 2 |
206 | 206 | 2 | People will assume that low numbers won't work so they will pick higher numbers. People that pick low because of this thinking will pick 1. |
207 | 207 | 2 | 2 is an integer |
208 | 208 | 2 | Randomly drawn from an exponential distribution |
209 | 209 | 2 | Second test to see if its possible to spam guesses. |
210 | 210 | 2 | Everyone else who chooses a low number will choose 1. |
211 | 211 | 2 | Taking the route of hoping that other choose to go for larger numbers in belief that all the smaller numbers are all chosen. Stayed away from 1 as ut probably will be spammed. |
212 | 212 | 2 | a |
213 | 213 | 2 | Lots of people not paying attention to the instructions could choose 1 |
214 | 214 | 2 | get em all |
215 | 215 | 2 | Likely that someone will pick the number 1 and instinct for unique number is high so going against the odds |
216 | 216 | 2 | Hopefully everyone assumes the lowest numbers will be taken, and choose higher numbers. Somebody else may think like I do and pick 1. Terrible logic probably but cheers! |
217 | 217 | 2 | It's the smallest number larger than 1. |
218 | 218 | 2 | Guessing |
219 | 219 | 2 | I assumed that everyone else playing would themselves assume that a lot of the low numbers would be taken. I then thought I could be a lone person to actually put "1," which others might avoid for being too obvious. However between the possibility that other people followed my exact logic, and the possibility that some would submit while misunderstanding the question, I chose the next lowest positive integer: 2. |
220 | 220 | 2 | I just thought that no one else would pick it since they would assume it was already chosen. |
221 | 221 | 2 | I wanted to choose 1 and hope no one else would be that bad at this game. Then I got worried that other people would be that bad at this game so I chose 2. Watch, now it will turn out that no one chose 1 and several chose 2. |
222 | 222 | 2 | My logic is that if there are 81 registered riddlers who all have experience on this site and trying to "out-predict" other people there is likely someone who thinks that one won't be put because it's too predictable but I would like to predict that multiple people think one will go unused so here I am using two in hopes that no other soul out there out-predicts my out-predictions. |
223 | 223 | 2 | figured everybody would say 1 so i took the next lowest. price is right style |
224 | 224 | 2 | Most people will think 1 is clever or pick a random larger number hoping no one else picks it |
225 | 225 | 2 | It's too much of an obvious number that maybe no one else will pick it! |
226 | 226 | 2 | A lot of people will choose 1 to mess with it, but will forsake 2 for the same reason. |
227 | 227 | 2 | Somebody had to submit it |
228 | 228 | 2 | I figured no one would pick a really low number. I didn't pick 1 because others would probably use the same logic and therefore pick the lowest number possible. |
229 | 229 | 2 | I figure most people will choose higher numbers, and a few clever fellows will choose 1 and hope for the best, so I guess I'm choosing 2 and hoping no one thinks of that? |
230 | 230 | 2 | I remember seeing this question in Uni once, 25 years ago. A bunch of people submitted 1, 3 was popular as well, but no-one submitted 2. So I'm picking 2. |
231 | 231 | 2 | I didn't think this through too hard. I figure people will put 1 expecting no one else to, so I'll choose 2 hoping no one else picked it. Otherwise it's just a guessing game, and I'm afraid of guessing too high. |
232 | 232 | 2 | Using findings from World Scientific Article: http://www.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au/personal/dabbott/publications/FNL_zeng2007.pdf |
233 | 233 | 2 | Seems like there will be at least one person who will just throw out 1 hoping no one else does. I'll try a little higher (but I fear recursive reasoning will rule me out too). |
234 | 234 | 2 | Funsies |
235 | 235 | 2 | no one will guess it - expecting others to have done so |
236 | 236 | 2 | im guessing most people wont choose a small number at the risk of it being non-unique. those who do will hopefully hedge all their bets and pick extremely low, (1), and im hoping no one will pick 2. |
237 | 237 | 3 | Premonition |
238 | 238 | 3 | I figure a lot of people will go with 1 hoping that no one else does, a bunch will go with 2 thinking they might be the only one, and then everyone else will pick arbitrarily higher numbers (as I'm about to do with a 2nd submission). |
239 | 239 | 3 | 3 |
240 | 240 | 3 | The higher you go the better chance of being unique, but the worse chance of winning. 3 is probably too low. |
241 | 241 | 3 | It's lower than 4. |
242 | 242 | 3 | It's lower than 4. |
243 | 243 | 3 | Well you said UNIQUE and I figured 1 would be taken, therefore, 3. |
244 | 244 | 3 | It seemed that 1 and 2 would be popular choices |
245 | 245 | 3 | A bunch of people will choose 1 assuming that everyone else will overthink it (they wont) A bunch of people will choose 2 trying to outsmart the 1s (They Won'T) 3 will take it (actually it won't...but oh well) |
246 | 246 | 3 | some will submit 1, thinking that no one else will bother; some will submit 2, having realized that some will submit 1. I'm betting on the slim chance that no one besides me will think to submit 3. Or that those who think it through that far will skip 3 and go to 4 or higher. |
247 | 247 | 3 | Most people thinking rationally will probably choose a number that's moderately high, to decrease the chances of another person picking it. If we assume that most people reason as such, then a lower number will actually have a higher chance of being the winner. 1 will probably not be unique, since a number of people could reason this far. 2 might not be unique, since a number of people could reason this far. This logic could continue indefinitely, the stopping point is based loosely on how many people are likely to see and respond to the riddle and go through the aforementioned reasoning, a number whose magnitude I estimated from the amount of people commenting on the Healthcare debate liveblog (thus an estimate of the amount of people who frequent FiveThirtyEight). I'd be very interested to see this experiment conducted many times over differing crowd sizes and see if, as I suspect, the winning number is positively correlated to amount of participants. |
248 | 248 | 3 | I assume most people will assume that low numbers are too obvious. I spent a lot of time thinking about bigger numbers and then second guessed myself and here I am. |
249 | 249 | 3 | Because 3...is a magic number |
250 | 250 | 3 | Seems reasonable |
251 | 251 | 3 | Some may go for the win with 1, others may assume them with 2, 3 is still high risk high reward but less risk than the other 2 |
252 | 252 | 3 | 3 is an integer |
253 | 253 | 3 | Lots of people will pick one. Some people will try to pick 2 just to outsmart those people. I am going to outsmart the smarts. A lot of people will try to pick very high numbers, assuming that low numbers will be duplicated. |
254 | 254 | 3 | Why not? Go big, but not really... |
255 | 255 | 3 | Someone will pick 1 and 2 hoping all other pick random higher number. Probably 3 as well but who knows. |
256 | 256 | 3 | No real reason |
257 | 257 | 3 | a |
258 | 258 | 3 | get em all |
259 | 259 | 3 | - |
260 | 260 | 3 | There are two people that will try to solve this problem. Those that choose very low numbers gambling that no one else will, and those that try to choose the lowest high number that others would not have taken. As 2nd place has no value in a competition like this, I feel the correct way to maximize your results is to choose the first method. However, I slightly hedge because someone had to choose 1 and 2... right? Maybe, or something? |
261 | 261 | 3 | 1 is the obvious answer if there were only one submission... but I assume the website has more readers than just myself. Again, assuming most people will realize similarly and pick >30 again assuming the lower numbers have already been chosen by others... But what happens when everyone thinks the same thing and skips the numbers under 10. Okay, it's not 3 but I'm not a game theory expert. |
262 | 262 | 3 | Guessing |
263 | 263 | 3 | it would have been nice to know the approximate number of people likely to participate. I first thought of choosing 1 thinking that nobody would be so bold as to try it. But since it was my first thought I scrapped the idea. Next I thought someone thinking along those lines might inch up to 2 to avoid the 1's. Then I decided that people not trying super low answers might just skip over 3 and go higher. |
264 | 264 | 3 | Because why not? |
265 | 265 | 3 | I figured most people would pick double digit numbers, but someone would pick one. Then someone else would think that and pick 2. I hope nobody thinks two steps ahead and pick 3. |
266 | 266 | 3 | Figured many people would have picked 1 thinking that most others would go high. So I went just above 1 |
267 | 267 | 3 | I'm just doing my part to make sure people who submit really small numbers don't win. |
268 | 268 | 3 | My wife said 2, I said 4; I averaged them. Guaranteed to work |
269 | 269 | 3 | It's low, but not too low |
270 | 270 | 4 | I expect a number of people to say 1-3, but 4 is viewed as more obscure |
271 | 271 | 4 | Everyone picks one, everyone who thinks that picks two. Three has got to be someone's favorite number, but no one likes 4 |
272 | 272 | 4 | Because its a low number that doesn't seem to publicized. I think there will a couple of 1's "just in case" and then some two's and three's for about the same reason and because their low primes people will think of. 5 and 7 are also numbers that pop into mind quickly. I rarely think of the number 4 so I assume other people also rarely think of it. |
273 | 273 | 4 | Many people, thinking the number must be unique, would probably choose a smallish number, probably two digits. Others, thinking further, might decide to pick the number 1 in the hope that nobody else would think of doing so. In the end, I decided on 4 as I thought it sounded not random enough to be picked by others. |
274 | 274 | 4 | Trolls will select 1, reasonable people might pick 2 or 3. 4 is a number that maybe a lot of people will forget about? (Poor 4) |
275 | 275 | 4 | who knows |
276 | 276 | 4 | The winning integer will be lower than most expect. |
277 | 277 | 4 | Seems more psychological than anything else. |
278 | 278 | 4 | I figure people are going to overall avoid low numbers, since they will guess that it won't be unique in a competition to pick a low number. This will create an opportunity for a low number to win. On the flip side, I think some people are going to try to pick a low number hoping that others will have been avoiding it for the reason above. 4 seemed like a good compromise. |
279 | 279 | 4 | I've won this game in the past with 4 |
280 | 280 | 4 | Data scientist |
281 | 281 | 4 | Many people will try to submit relatively high numbers. Some people will realize this and submit numbers closer to 1 as a result, trying to win. I guess that most people will not think to submit 4 and will rather go for the low-hanging fruit of 1, 2, or 3. |
282 | 282 | 4 | I am guessing that folks will avoid picking a very low number, so I am trying to exploit that by picking a low number. Except that at least one person will try this same strategy for 1-3, so I am picking 4 (I don't expect it to work). |
283 | 283 | 4 | 1 or 2 is too low. When picking a random number, I suspect most people lean towards odd numbers, so, 4 it is. Probably way too low; this one seems ripe for collusion and automated entries... |
284 | 284 | 4 | 4 is a good number. |
285 | 285 | 4 | Some one will inevitably pick 1 or 2, but maybe skip the next few for higher ones |
286 | 286 | 4 | I suspect most people who think on this are going to try for prime numbers. One is altogether too cute and someone will try it. Four is the first non-one prime number. Course, anything you can count on your fingers is a likely target, so but I can't think of a better criteria off hand. |
287 | 287 | 4 | It's one of the smallest positive integers. |
288 | 288 | 4 | Because it's gonna win! |
289 | 289 | 4 | Last week there were 3 comments on the Riddler page. I assume more people participate than comment, but there can't be thousands of participants so why not try for a non-round, non-prime number near the bottom of the pile? |
290 | 290 | 4 | I picked 4. |
291 | 291 | 4 | it's the lowest number that no one else will pick. |
292 | 292 | 4 | I was taking too long trying to think about Nash equilibrium and estimating the number of people that will be playing this game, so I decided to ignore all of that and guess a small number that might be overlooked. Also I like the number 4. |
293 | 293 | 4 | I'm betting most people will be assuming that the lowest numbers (1-10) are already taken and won't choose those. Of course, there are others like me thinking the same thing and would then choose them, so while I'd *like* to choose "1," I'm not, because I figure there's at least one other person out there who did so based on that same thought process. So, I decided to stick with a low number, but choosing four, as I just feel like it's gonna be skipped over. |
294 | 294 | 4 | I reviewed studies showing that, when selecting a number at random, people are more likely to pick odd numbers and prime numbers than computers are. So I picked the lowest even, non-prime integer that was available. |
295 | 295 | 4 | 4 is an integer |
296 | 296 | 4 | 4 is a pretty unassuming number. I figure 1 to 3 will get a fair number of picks, and beyond that random selections of larger numbers. |
297 | 297 | 4 | People will overlook low numbers because they are too obvious. I think 4 as an even number might get jumped by many people. |
298 | 298 | 4 | Trusting my gut |
299 | 299 | 4 | The first three numbers have already been selected ;) and no one will think of submitting 4. |
300 | 300 | 4 | It's my favorite |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited
CREATE TABLE "riddler-pick-lowest/low_numbers" ( "Your Number" TEXT, "Show Your Work" TEXT );