Quick dating
Custom Menu
  • america women dating
  • Free adult chat for the over 40s
  • NEWS
    City Attorney Eugene Mei declined to comment or answer questions about the situation on Tuesday night. What makes a researcher or scientist more likely to make a truly original discovery or invention, and at a broader level, one could question why some societies are more open to innovation than others. After the punching finally stopped, Anton walked up to me shirtless and sweaty, caked with blood and dirt, his arms outstretched in an unmistakable gesture of victory. Pistols at dawn seemed a ludicrous symbol of male egotism, and I longed for men in tailored suits, who solved arguments with Woody Allen jokes and New Yorker references.


    Dating game economics

    Nash’s equilibrium concept, which earned him a Nobel Prize in economics in 1994, offers a unified framework for understanding strategic behavior not only in economics but also in psychology, evolutionary biology and a host of other fields.Its influence on economic theory “is comparable to that of the discovery of the DNA double helix in the biological sciences,” wrote Roger Myerson of the University of Chicago, another economics Nobelist.In contrast with, say, a ball rolling downhill and coming to rest in a valley, there is no obvious force guiding game players toward a Nash equilibrium.“It has always been a thorn in the side of microeconomists,” said Tim Roughgarden, a theoretical computer scientist at Stanford University.When players are at equilibrium, no one has a reason to stray.But how do players get to equilibrium in the first place?For example, in the 100-player restaurant game, there are 2.This communication bottleneck means that every possible method for adapting strategies from round to round is going to fail to guide players efficiently to a Nash equilibrium for at least some complex games (such as a 100-player restaurant game with complicated preferences).

    This is especially the case if — as is typical in the real world — each player knows only how much she herself values the game’s different outcomes, and not how much her fellow players do.Economists often use Nash equilibrium analyses to justify proposed economic reforms, Myerson said.But the new result says that economists can’t assume that game players will get to a Nash equilibrium, unless they can justify what is special about the particular game in question.In a paper posted online last September, they proved that no method of adapting strategies in response to previous games — no matter how commonsensical, creative or clever — will converge efficiently to even an approximate Nash equilibrium for every possible game.It’s “a very sweeping negative result,” Roughgarden said.

    Leave a Reply


    Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 | Next | Last


    




    Copyright © 2017 - www.m2033.ru