I'm thinking about a game theory problem related to factorization. Here it is,
Q: two players A and B are playing this factorization game. At very first, we have a natural number $270000=2^4\times 3^3\times 5^4$ on a chalkboard.
in their own turn, each player chooses one number $N$ from the chalkboard and erase it, and then write down new two natural numbers $X$ and $Y$ satisfying
(1) $N=X\times Y$ (2) $gcd(X,Y)>1$ (So, they are "NOT" coprime)
a player loses if he cannot do this process in his turn.
So, in this game, possible states at $k$-th turn are actually sequence of natural numbers $a_1,a_2,\dots,a_k$ with $a_i>1$ and $a_1\times a_2\dots \times a_k=270000$
EXAMPLE of this game)
A's turn-$2^{4}\times3^{3}\times5^{4}$
B's turn-$2^2\times3\times5^2,2^2\times3^2\times5^2$
A's turn-$2^2\times3\times5^2,2\times3\times5,2\times3\times5$
B's turn-$2\times5,2\times3\times5,2\times3\times5,2\times3\times5$
So B loses in above case.
Actually, in this game, the first player(So, A) has winning strategy.
What is this winning strategy for A?
-Attempted approach: I tried to find what is "winning position" and "losing position" for this combinatorial game. but classifying these positions were not so obvious.
What is A's winning strategy? Thanks for any help in advance.
This is nim in disguise. I suggest you represent a pile by a sequence of the exponents of the primes, so $270000$ would be represented by $(4,3,4)$ You can then sort the starting numbers in order, as $(4,4,3)$ would play exactly the same. A legal move is replacing a sequence with two sequences such that: the sum of the corresponding positions in the new sequences matches the number in the original sequence and at least one position of the new sequences is greater than zero in both. For example, from $(4,3,4)$ you can move to $(2,3,4)+(2,0,0)$ or to $(3,2,1)+(1,1,3)$ or to $(4,1,2)+(0,2,2)$, but not to $(4,3,0)+(0,0,4)$. You are trying to find the nim values of various positions.
I would start with single position sequences, so the original number is a prime power. $(1)$ is a losing position, so is $*0$. $(2)$ is clearly $*1$ as you have to move to $(1)+(1)$. $(3)$ is losing, so is $*0$. $(4)$ is $*1$ because you can only move to $*0$. From $(5)$ you can only move to $*1$, so it is $*0$ and losing. A single even pile is winning as you can move to two piles half the size, then mirror your opponent's play, so is $*0$. A single odd pile is losing and is $*1$.
I claim that as first player I can win any game of the form $(a,b)$ with $a\gt 1, b \gt 1$. The point is that an entry of $0$ in a sequence is equivalent to an entry of $1$ as neither can be divided and neither can provide the matching entry. I will move to either $(a,1)+(0,b-1)$ or to $(a-1,1)+(1,b-1)$, whichever makes the large numbers have the same parity. Then I either leave $*0+*0$ or $*1+*1$, both of which are $*0$ and losing for my opponent.
I believe a similar argument can be made for longer sequences, but have not fleshed it out. You can kill off one of the entries of the sequence by leaving $0$ or $1$ in that location in one of the daughter sequences and one of them will win.