-
She said, no matter what the other person does, she reckons she'd get a better grade if she chose Alpha.
她说无论别人怎么选,她觉得选α会使自己得到最优的结果
-
So in both cases, no matter what the other person does, she receives a higher payoff from choosing Alpha, so she should choose Alpha.
这两种情况下,无论别人怎么选,她选α总能得到更好的成绩,所以她应该选α
-
But if there is another argument for that claim, I'm eager to hear it, because this argument, at any rate, seems to me to be unsuccessful.
但如果确实有这种论点存在，我迫不及待地想听一听，因为这个论点无论怎么看，似乎都不会说得通。
-
And the answer is sure. Because what do I do?
每一阶段，无论怎么分支？
-
So a loop or an infinite loop, because true is always true, there is no-- nothing on the screen that seems to change this keyword true, so this is actually a deliberate infinite loop, but so was that thing up top to forever say hi or whatever it is you wanted to do.
因此而出现死循环，屏幕上的这些语句无论怎么运行,都无法改变它为真的事实，这就是所谓的死循环，无论你想不想要,屏幕上都会不断打印出“hi“
-
We say that my strategy Alpha strictly dominates my strategy Beta, if my payoff from Alpha is strictly greater than that from beta, regardless of what others do."
无论别人怎么选,如果选α得到的结果严格优于β,那么α相对于β是个严格优势策略"
-
So if you defend the easy pass, from his point of view, it doesn't matter whether he chooses the easy pass and gets one in there or the hard pass, he gets one in there.
那么如果你防守平坦的路,从他的立场出发,无论怎么选择,选崎岖之途收益是1,而选择平坦之途的收益也是1
-
So to say it in words, Player i's strategy "s'i" is strictly dominated by her strategy "si," if "si" always does strictly better -- always yields a higher payoff for Player i -- no matter what the other people do.
用文字来描述就是,参与人i的策略s'i严格劣于si,如果si总是更好的选择,即总能给参与人i带来更高的收益,而无论其他参与人怎么选
-
I'll say it again, Player i's strategy "s'i" is weakly dominated by her strategy "si" if she always does at least as well by choosing "si" than choosing "s'i" regardless of what everyone else does, and sometimes she does strictly better.
重申一下,参与者i的策略s'i,弱劣于策略si,当且仅当无论对手怎么做,她选择si的收益至少与选s'i的相等,有些情况下甚至是严格占优的
应用推荐