We're also going to assume, just as we did last time, that voters are going to vote for the closest candidate.

我们还要假设,像上次一样,选民会选择离他最近的候选人

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

The second assumption we're going to make which is new is that we're going to assume that candidates cannot choose their position.

我们给出的第二个假设,这个新的假设是,候选人不能选择他们的位置

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

The voters, or candidates, whatever you want to call them, depending on where they stand, in this game they're going to be you.

选民或候选人,随便你们想怎么叫,基于他们的选择,在这个博弈中他们是你们

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So this procedure leads us to conclude that the candidates will choose positions 5 and 6.

所以从中我们总结出来,候选人会选择5和6

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So it's quite difficult in the real world for candidates to position themselves.

所以在现实生活中候选人,选择位置是很难的

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

It means that choosing position 2 always gives me a higher share of the vote than choosing position 1, no matter where the other candidate positions herself.

意味着选择立场2,会比选择立场1,获得更多的选票,无论另一个候选人如何选择

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

Extrapolating from the fact that there are different things which people take into account, not everyone closest to 6 might actually vote for 6, it might be coincidence.

考虑到人们关注的东西都不一样,这个实际情况,每个最靠近立场6的人,未必把票都投给选择立场6的候选人了,这可能只是巧合

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

You're always going to end up voting for the candidate who's closest.

你们总是要选择,最近的候选人

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

We're just saying we want What we're saying is, we know that the candidates aren't going to position themselves at 1 and aren't going to position themselves at 10.

我们只是想,我们要说的是,我们知道候选人,不会选择立场1,同样也不会选择立场10

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

The candidates here are going to try and choose positions.

这两个候选人需要选择自己的政治立场

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So suppose the other candidate has chosen position 1.

假设另一个候选人选择立场1

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So the other candidate has chosen position 1.

另一个候选人选择立场1

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选

So candidates cannot choose their position.

候选人不能选择他们的立场

耶鲁公开课 - 博弈论课程节选