REVIEW 2 cited by
River Crossing Problems: Algebraic Approach
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
We consider two river crossing problems, about jealous husbands and about missionaries and cannibals. The missionaries and cannibals problem arose a thousand years after the jealous husbands problem, although its solution had actually appeared several hundred years before its formulation. We apply an algebraic approach to study these problems, using a symmetry group action on the state set of the jealous husband problem; then category theory is used to describe the relationship between the two problems. Some historical issues are also touched, related to the fact that the missionaries and cannibals problem arose precisely when the group approach began to be widely spread and popularized. This is the approach that naturally connects both problems.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Rethinking the Illusion of Thinking
Reasoning models' Towers of Hanoi failures persist under stepwise prompting, while River Crossing failures mostly vanish when tests are restricted to solvable configurations.
-
Comment on The Illusion of Thinking: Understanding the Strengths and Limitations of Reasoning Models via the Lens of Problem Complexity
The paper claims that the reported accuracy collapse of reasoning models on planning puzzles is mostly caused by output length limits and unsolvable benchmark instances, not by reasoning failure.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.