This is a video about (170705) 주간 아이돌 310회 블랙핑크 (BLACKPINK) - Weekly idol ep 310 BLACKPINK

主要支援：已於2009年4月8日到期 延伸支援：已於2014年4月8日到期（仅限Service Pack 3 x86（SP3 x86）及Service Pack 2 x64（SP2 x64）） 新增的功能 移除的功能 版本 开发历史 批評 主题 Windows XP（开发代号：）是微软公司推出供个人电脑使用的操作系统，包括商用及家用的桌上型电脑、笔记本电脑、媒体中心（英语：）和平板电脑等。其RTM版于2001年8月24日发布；零售版于2001年10月25日上市。其名字「」的意思是英文中的「体验」（）。Windows ..

Nov 13, 2019- Explore dobdan222's board "교복", followed by 405 people on Pinterest. See more ideas about Asian girl, Korean student and Fashion.

Nov 10, 2019- Explore cutebear36088's board "여고딩", followed by 557 people on Pinterest. See more ideas about School looks, Fashion and School uniform.

Republika obeh narodov Habsburška monarhija Bavarska Saška Franconia Švabska Zaporoški kozaki Velika vojvodina Toskana Drugo obleganje Dunaja je potekalo leta 1683; pričelo se je 14. julija 1683, ko je Osmanski imperij obkolil Dunaj in končalo 11. septembra ..

Robert Henry Goldsborough (January 4, 1779 – October 5, 1836) was an American politician from Talbot County, Maryland. Goldsborough was born at "Myrtle Grove" near Easton, Maryland. He was educated by private tutors and graduated from St. John's College in ..

Anabolic steroids, also known more properly as anabolic–androgenic steroids (AAS), are steroidal androgens that include natural androgens like testosterone as well as synthetic androgens that are structurally related and have similar effects to testosterone. ..

In game theory, the * war of attrition* is a dynamic timing game in which players choose a time to stop, and fundamentally trade off the strategic gains from outlasting other players and the real costs expended with the passage of time. Its precise opposite is the

To see how a war of attrition works, consider the all pay auction: Assume that each player makes a bid on an item, and the one who bids the highest wins a resource of value *V*. Each player pays his bid. In other words, if a player bids *b*, then his payoff is *-b* if he loses, and *V-b* if he wins. Finally, assume that if both players bid the same amount *b*, then they split the value of *V*, each gaining *V*/2-*b*. Finally, think of the bid *b* as time, and this becomes the war of attrition, since a higher bid is costly, but the higher bid wins the prize.

The premise that the players may bid any number is important to analysis of the all-pay, sealed-bid, second-price auction. The bid may even exceed the value of the resource that is contested over. This at first appears to be irrational, being seemingly foolish to pay more for a resource than its value; however, remember that each bidder only pays the *low* bid. Therefore, it would seem to be in each player's best interest to bid the maximum possible amount rather than an amount equal to or less than the value of the resource.

There is a catch, however; if both players bid higher than *V*, the high bidder does not so much win as lose less. The player who bid the lesser value *b* loses *b* and the one who bid more loses *b* -*V* (where, in this scenario, b>V). This situation is commonly referred to as a Pyrrhic victory. For a tie such that *b*>*V*/2, they both lose *b*-*V*/2. Luce and Raiffa referred to the latter situation as a "ruinous situation";^{[3]} both players suffer, and there is no winner.

The conclusion one can draw from this pseudo-matrix is that there is no value to bid which is beneficial in all cases, so there is no dominant strategy. However, there are multiple asymmetric weak Nash Equilibria in pure strategies. For example, either player could commit to any bid *b*≥*V*. The other player's best response is to bid zero as there is no bid with which she can win the prize and receive a positive payoff.^{[4]} The player with the positive bid pays nothing in equilibrium. So, she has no incentive to bid less. This equilibrium is subgame perfect.^{[5]}

There is also a symmetric equilibrium in mixed strategies.

Another popular formulation of the war of attrition is as follows: two players are involved in a dispute. The value of the object to each player is . Time is modeled as a continuous variable which starts at zero and runs indefinitely. Each player chooses when to concede the object to the other player. In the case of a tie, each player receives utility. Time is valuable, each player uses one unit of utility per period of time. This formulation is slightly more complex since it allows each player to assign a different value to the object. We assume that both players know the valuation of the other player. Thus, the game is a complete information game.

The unique symmetric Nash equilibrium is defined by the following survival function for *t*:^{[6]}

The value , for a player *i* whose opponent values the resource at over time *t*, is the probability that *t ≥ x*. This strategy does not guarantee the win for either player. Rather, it is the optimal strategy given that your opponent also plays a strategy of the same form. Note that if ,

So, the player with the lower value persists longer than the player with the higher value. This means that the player with the lower value has a higher probability of winning the war.^{[4]} Note that there does not exist any *x* such that the survival function equals zero. So, the distribution of bids has full support. Moreover, both players receive an expected payoff of zero because their payoff is zero at *t*=*0* and their expected payoff must be equal at every value of *t*.

The unique evolutionarily stable strategy coincides with the symmetric Nash equilibrium.^{[7]} This follows from the fact that any ESS must be a Nash equilibrium and the fact that no pure persistence time can be an ESS. That no pure persistence time is an ESS can be demonstrated simply by considering a putative ESS bid of *x*, which will be beaten by a bid of *x+*.

It has also been shown that even if the individuals can only play pure strategies, the time average of the strategy value of all individuals converges precisely to the calculated ESS. In such a setting, one can observe a cyclic behavior of the competing individuals.^{[8]}

- ↑ Maynard Smith, J. (1974). "The theory of games and the evolution of animal conflicts" (PDF).
*Journal of Theoretical Biology*.**47**: 209–221. doi:10.1016/0022-5193(74)90110-6. - ↑ Bishop, D.T.; Cannings, C. (1978). "A generalized war of attrition".
*Journal of Theoretical Biology*.**70**(1): 85–124. doi:10.1016/0022-5193(78)90304-1. PMID 564432. - ↑ Luce, R. D.; Raiffa, H. (1957).
*Games and Decisions: Introduction and Critical Survey*(Paperback reprint ed.). New York: Wiley. MR 0087572. - 1 2 Levin, Jonathan. "Wars of Attrition" (PDF).
- ↑ Drew Fudenberg; Jean Tirole (1991).
*Game Theory*. MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-06141-4. - ↑ Wildrick Thomas, Matthew (2021-03-22). "Nonlinear War of Attrition with Complete Information".
*Matthew Wildrick Thomas's Blog*. Retrieved 2021-03-22. - ↑ Prestwich, Ken. "A Mixed ESS Solution to the War of Attrition".
- ↑ Chatterjee, Krishnendu; Reiter, Johannes G.; Nowak, Martin A. (2012). "Evolutionary dynamics of biological auctions".
*Theoretical Population Biology*.**81**: 69–80. doi:10.1016/j.tpb.2011.11.003. PMC 3279759. PMID 22120126.

© 2019 raptorfind.com. Imprint, All rights reserved.