Sunday, April 29, 2007
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Friday, April 20, 2007
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Monday, April 16, 2007
Sunday, April 15, 2007
I reviewed lecture #5 notes just now and the workshop lecture #6 notes. I am half way through the course material now in my exam study review.
Saturday, April 14, 2007
I would like to complete reading and reviewing lectures #5 and #6 by midnight and then sleep when that is done.
Also in this chapter are the segregation models, the hawk dove game, the bourgeois games both pure and contested ;and in this chapter he introduces non-best-responses.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
So my progress report...I have two problems fully solved. I have another problem almost completely solved except for the final general form. I also have another problem involving extinction probabilities for a Poisson branching process solved except for the calculation of the ultimate extinction probability. The next problem after that is another ultimate extinction probability for a geometric branching process. Then I have a limiting distribution problem which we learned to solve in last afternoon's lecture.
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Monday, April 09, 2007
I am only staying up for another five hours. I do mean to go to the university of Ottawa library this morning to read this week's required reading for our economics systems design course tomorrow. Tomorrow will be our last lecture. I will just check the hours of the library and then go to school now. I also want to borrow a book on error measurement or at least look at it.
Sunday, April 08, 2007
I am tempted to make a 3 dimensional random walk that walks to all points in an origin centered cube. In other words the next step can be any combination of for any of the three axis. Thus giving 6 choices with walking towards a face, 8 choices of walking to a corner, and 12 choices of walking to an edge. This could be or in my alternative version we would weight the probability based on the vector length of the walk. The probability would be inversely related to the vector length of the step. Thus setting the probability of walking to a face as unity with probability and then set the others to the inversion of their vector lengths. Thus walking along a diagonal would be walking to an edge and would have a probability of and walking to a corner would have probability .
Then a basic law of probability would be used to create this equation which would solve for
Saturday, April 07, 2007
I now have successful random walks in 1, 2, 3, and 4 dimensions and have interactive plots for 1, 2, and 3 dimensions stable for runs of 1000 steps. I can not get a stable interactive plot in 4 dimensions. I also tried diagonal and axis walking random walks. This should be 4 walks with both diagonal and axis walking for 8 walks but for each walk I have an interactive and non-interactive walk for total of 16 R programs. I have 11 done now and must do three more 1 dimensional walks and 2 more 4 dimensional walks. The interactive walks plot the steps at each step and the non interactive draw a plot at the end of the walk showing the path of the walk after all steps are taken.
Thursday, April 05, 2007
In my other course we looked at a model in Bowles for three person games describing the rise of agriculture and sharing and punishing in an extension of the solution of the hawk dove game and looked at the so called bourgeois strategy solution to this new game. I think anything that dictates a strategy is not a bourgeois strategy but certainly owning property which dictates the bourgeois strategy can be interpreted as a position of wealth that dictates a strategy. Thus our modeling of labour negotiations which is dependent on worker efforts might be called the hard workers/shirking worker strategy and has polar opposite effects on workers and management but then in Bowles model effort would not be monitorable so would lead to disagreements at the bargaining table as too whether workers were working too hard for too little for the workers to bargain in good faith or too little for the costs the employer endures or too hard for the money the employer pays.