The gain−loss structure of 10X-IGT.

*Note: Expected value of decks A and B was increased −1500 (i.e. −150*10) while EV of decks C and D was increased 250 in each section; the contrast of final outcome between good and bad decks was larger than that of 1X-version.1st section: Deck A: −250 + 0*(−150*10) = −250; Deck B: −250 + 0*(−150*10) = −250; Deck C: 250 + 0*(25*10) = 250; Deck D: 250 + 0*(25*10) = 2502nd section: Deck A: −250 + 1*(−150*10) = −1750; Deck B: −250 + 1*(−150*10) = −1750; Deck C: 250 + 1*(25*10) = 500; Deck D: 250 + 1*(25*10) = 5003rd section: Deck A: −250 + 2*(−150*10) = −3250; Deck B: −250 + 2*(−150*10) = −3250; Deck C: 250 + 2*(25*10) = 750; Deck D: 250 + 2*(25*10) = 7504th section: Deck A: −250 + 3*(−150*10) = −4750; Deck B: −250 + 3*(−150*10) = −4750; Deck C: 250 + 3*(25*10) = 1000; Deck D: 250 + 3*(25*10) = 10005th section: Deck A: −250 + 4*(−150*10) = −6250; Deck B: −250 + 4*(−150*10) = −6250; Deck C: 250 + 4*(25*10) = 1250; Deck D: 250 + 4*(25*10) = 12506th section: Deck A: −250 + 5*(−150*10) = −7750; Deck B: −250 + 5*(−150*10) = −7750; Deck C: 250 + 5*(25*10) = 1500; Deck D: 250 + 5*(25*10) = 1500