%0 Journal Article %1 chaplick2014concurrent %A Chaplick, Steven %A Micek, Piotr %A Ueckerdt, Torsten %A Wiechert, Veit %D 2014 %K arxiv myown %T A note on concurrent graph sharing games %U http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.1021 %X In the concurrent graph sharing game, two players, called First and Second, share the vertices of a connected graph with positive vertex-weights summing up to $1$ as follows. The game begins with First taking any vertex. In each proceeding round, the player with the smaller sum of collected weights so far chooses a non-taken vertex adjacent to a vertex which has been taken, i.e., the set of all taken vertices remains connected and one new vertex is taken in every round. (It is assumed that no two subsets of vertices have the same sum of weights.) One can imagine the players consume their taken vertex over a time proportional to its weight, before choosing a next vertex. In this note we show that First has a strategy to guarantee vertices of weight at least $1/3$ regardless of the graph and how it is weighted. This is best-possible already when the graph is a cycle. Moreover, if the graph is a tree First can guarantee vertices of weight at least $1/2$, which is clearly best-possible.

@article{chaplick2014concurrent, abstract = {In the concurrent graph sharing game, two players, called First and Second, share the vertices of a connected graph with positive vertex-weights summing up to $1$ as follows. The game begins with First taking any vertex. In each proceeding round, the player with the smaller sum of collected weights so far chooses a non-taken vertex adjacent to a vertex which has been taken, i.e., the set of all taken vertices remains connected and one new vertex is taken in every round. (It is assumed that no two subsets of vertices have the same sum of weights.) One can imagine the players consume their taken vertex over a time proportional to its weight, before choosing a next vertex. In this note we show that First has a strategy to guarantee vertices of weight at least $1/3$ regardless of the graph and how it is weighted. This is best-possible already when the graph is a cycle. Moreover, if the graph is a tree First can guarantee vertices of weight at least $1/2$, which is clearly best-possible.}, added-at = {2017-02-07T13:26:12.000+0100}, author = {Chaplick, Steven and Micek, Piotr and Ueckerdt, Torsten and Wiechert, Veit}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/22d3df3f883e20167917c6f212fc7e912/chaplick}, description = {A note on concurrent graph sharing games}, interhash = {2453a56efaef4ec3b1174d7c2e4a0f4b}, intrahash = {2d3df3f883e20167917c6f212fc7e912}, keywords = {arxiv myown}, timestamp = {2017-02-07T19:46:36.000+0100}, title = {A note on concurrent graph sharing games}, url = {http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.1021}, year = 2014 }