Individual reflective assessment Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Individual intelligent appraisal - Essay Example numerous abilities and the module ‘Academic Skills for Accountancy’ has helped me a great deal in building up a portion of the aptitudes required for the calling of evaluating. Following are abilities identified with bookkeeping that I have created all through the module. One of the most significant aptitudes for an evaluator is to have the option to fundamentally assess the review proof got because of the review techniques which incorporate requests from the administration, perception of the methodology done by the executives and examination of bookkeeping records. Through this semester, I have built up this ability altogether. The course has acquainted me with points of interest of the abilities required for basic assessment of proof. For the anticipated year, I intend to build up this expertise by leading further research on the review and by considering commonsense models in regards to reviews of huge substances. One of the most significant regions that would be engaged would be of expert suspicion. Proficient doubt is the capacity of an evaluator to keep a scrutinizing brain and this demeanor encourages the reviewer not to sum up the aftereffects of the assessment of proof got. I would figure out how to create proficient incredulity. A capacity each bookkeeper must have is the capacity to examine the data furnished and to make determinations with adequate justification. A similar ability is additionally significant for an evaluator since it is the obligation of a reviewer to break down the proof got and to give a sensible confirmation upheld by legitimized ends. The semester helped me fundamentally in improving this capacity (Cottrell 2008). In bookkeeping, every exchange has a double impact accordingly if any one piece of the exchange isn't recorded, it tends to be followed from the other part. Along these lines, everything in the budgetary records gets connected and the missing connections can be found by breaking down the recorded data. A similar expertise is likewise profoundly significant for the calling of evaluating. Since this is

History of Kitchen Appliance Inventions

History of Kitchen Appliance Inventions By definition, the kitchen is a room utilized for food readiness that is regularly outfitted with an oven, a sink for cleaning food and dish-washing, and cupboards and coolers for putting away food and hardware. Kitchens have been around for a considerable length of time, nonetheless, it was not until post-common war period that most of kitchen machines were designed. The explanation was that a great many people no longer had hirelings and housewives working alone in the kitchen required culinary assistance. The approach of ​electricity extraordinarily propelled the innovation of work sparing kitchen apparatuses. History of Large Kitchen Appliances Dishwasher: In 1850, Joel Houghton licensed a wooden machine with a hand-turned wheel that sprinkled water on dishes, it was not really a serviceable machine, however it was the first patent.Garbage Disposer: Architect, innovator John W. Hammes manufactured his significant other the universes first kitchen trash disposer in 1927. After 10â years of structure improvement, Hammes started a new business offering his machine to general society. His organization was known as the In-Sink-Erator Manufacturing Company.Ovens or Stoves: The first chronicled record of an oven alludes to a gadget worked in 1490 in Alsace, France.Microwave Ovens: The microwave was imagined by Percy L. Spencer.Refrigerator: Before mechanical refrigeration frameworks were presented, individuals cooled their food with ice and day off, discovered locally or brought down from the mountains. History of Small Kitchen Appliances Apple Parer: On February 14, 1803, the apple parer was licensed by Moses Coates.Blender: In 1922, Stephen Poplawski developed the blender.Cheese-Slicer: The cheddar slicer is a Norwegian invention.Corkscrews: Corkscrew designers were enlivened by an instrument called the bulletscrew or firearm worm, a gadget that extricated stuck projectiles from rifles.Cuisinart Food Processor: Carl Sontheimer concocted the Cuisinart food processor.Green Garbage Bags: The recognizable green plastic trash pack (produced using polyethylene) was imagined by Harry Wasylyk in 1950.Electric Kettle: Arthur Leslie Large created the electric pot in 1922. General Electric presented the electric pot with a programmed cut-out in 1930.Weber Kettle Grill: George Stephen developed the first Weber Kettle Grill in 1951.Mason Jar: John Mason protected the screw neck bottle or the Mason Jar on November 30, 1858.Electric Mixers: The first patent that can profess to be for an electric blender was giv en on November 17, 1885, to Rufus M. Eastman. Lillian Moller Gilbreth (1878-1972), the mother of 12 kids, additionally protected an electric food blender (sometime in the future). Mixmaster: Ivar Jepson developed Sunbeam Mixmaster, which he protected in 1928, and first mass-showcased in 1930.Paper Towels: The Scott Paper Company was established in Philadelphia by Irvin and Clarence Scott in 1879. Siblings Seymour and Irvin Scott maintained a paper commission business for a long time, however the poor economy during the 1870s constrained them bankrupt. Irvin and his more youthful sibling, Clarence, at that point chose to shape their own organization out of the remaining parts of the first. Irvin allegedly acquired $2,000 from his dad in-law and added it to the $300 the two siblings needed to shape the capital of Scott Paper Company. In 1907, Scott Paper presented the Sani-Towels paper towel, the main paper towels. They were designed for use in Philadelphia study halls to help forestall the spread of the basic cold from kid to child.Peelers: The nineteenth-century made various kitchen use creations: toasters, potato mashers, apple/potato peelers, food chop pers, and wiener stuffers were completely imagined. More than 185 licenses for espresso processors and more than 500 licenses for apple/potato peelers were protected during the 1800s. Early peelers were made of iron and the patent number and other data were remembered for the throwing. Peelers extended from the recognizable and basic round turning pole with a blade sharp edge that stripped skin, to contraptions loaded with apparatuses and wheels that could strip, center, cut, and area. There were independent peelers intended for various products of the soil; there were even peelers that expelled the portions from ears of corn. Weight Cooker: In 1679, French physicist Denis Papin imagined the weight cooker, called Papins Digester, this water/air proof cooker created hot steam that prepared food all the more rapidly while safeguarding nutrients.Saran Wrap: Saran polyvinylidene chloride or Saran pitches and movies (called PVDC) have been wrapping items for more than 50 years.Soap and Detergents: The historical backdrop of cleansers and cleansers as we probably am aware them today go back to the 1800s.Squeegee: The single-cutting edge window cleaning squeegee was designed by Ettore Sceccone in 1936.Toaster: Toasting bread started as a strategy for dragging out the life of bread. It was a typical action in Roman occasions, tostum is the Latin word for searing or burning.Tupperware: Tupperware, plastic compartments with water/air proof tops, was created by Earl Silas Tupper.Waffle Iron: The waffle iron was protected on August 24, 1869, developed by Cornelius Swarthout of Troy, New York. The patent depicted the development as a gadget to heat waffles.

G?m? Th??ry 101 D?finiti?n, Ex?l?in?d, Ex?m?l??

G?m? Th??ry 101 D?finiti?n, Ex?l?in?d, Ex?m?l?? Ev?r? ?hild understands wh?t g?m?? ?r?. Wh?n ??m??n? ?v?rr???t?, we sometimes say “it’? ju?t a g?m?.”Games ?r? ?ft?n not ??ri?u?. G?m?? theories ?n th? other h?nd are mu?h different. They ?r? u?u?ll? ??ri?u? business.Th? ?ur???? of game theory fr?m it? b?ginning? in 1928 w?? t? be ???li?d to serious situations in ???n?mi??, politics, bu?in???, ?nd ?th?r areas.Ev?n w?r? ??n b? analysed by g?m? theory. G?m? th??r? i? u?u?ll? ???n ?? a m?th?m?ti??l g?m? where ?v?r? m?v? i? calculated ??r?full? in other to achieve th? ?x???t?d r??ult.HERE ARE SOME COMPONENTS OF A GAMERulesM?th?m?ti??l g?m?? h?v? ?tri?t rul??. Th?? specify wh?t i? allowed ?nd wh?t i?n’t.Th?ugh m?n? r??l-w?rld g?m?? ?ll?w for discovering n?w m?v?? ?r w??? to act, games th?t ??n b? analysed mathematically h?v? a rigid ??t ?f ????ibl? m?v??, u?u?ll? ?ll known in ?dv?n??.Outcomes ?nd payoffsChildr?n (?nd gr?wn-u?? too) play games f?r h?ur? for fun. M?th?m?ti??l g?m?? may h?v? many possible ?ut??m??, ???h ?r?du?ing pay offs f?r th? ?l???r?.Th? payoffs may b? m?n?t?r?, ?r th?? m?? express ??ti?f??ti?n. Y?u w?nt t? win the g?m?.Un??rt?int? ?f th? OutcomeA m?th?m?ti??l game i? “thrilling” in th?t its ?ut??m? ??nn?t b? predicted in ?dv?n??.Sin?? its rul?? are fix?d, this im?li?? th?t a g?m? must ?ith?r ??nt?in ??m? random ?l?m?nt? or h?v? m?r? than ?n? ?l???r.D??i?i?n makingA g?m? with n? decisions might be boring, at l???t f?r th? mind. Running a 100 m?t?r race d??? n?t r??uir? m?th?m?ti??l ?kill?, only fast l?g?.H?w?v?r, most ???rt g?m?? ?l?? inv?lv? decisions, and can therefore ?t l???t ??rtl? b? ?n?l?z?d by g?m? theory.N? ?h??tingIn r??l-lif? g?m?? ?h??ting i? ????ibl?. Ch??ting m??n? n?t ?l??ing by th? rul??.If, when ??ur ?h??? ????n?nt i? distracted, ??u t?k? ??ur ?u??n ?nd ?ut it on a b?tt?r ??u?r?, ??u are ?h??ting, as in ??k?r, wh?n you exchange ?n 8 in your h?nd with ?n ??? in your ?l??v?.G?m? theory doesn’t even ??kn?wl?dg? th? ?xi?t?n?? ?f ?h??ting.BASICS OF GAME THEORY: GAME, PLAY, MOVEA play i? an instance of th? game. In ??rt?in ?itu?ti?n?, called ???iti?n?, a ?l???r has d? m?k? a decision, ??ll?d a m?v? ?r an ??ti?n. Thi? i? not th? same ?? ?tr?t?g?. A ?tr?t?g? i? a ?l?n th?t tells th? player wh?t m?v? to choose in every ????ibl? ???iti?n.R?ti?n?l behaviour i? usually ???um?d for all ?l???r?. Th?t is, ?l???r? ?r? ???um?d to h?v? ?r?f?r?n???, styles ?nd beliefs ?b?ut th? w?rld ?nd then th?? tr? t? ?l?? th?ir game ?? th?? b??t ??? fit.It i? ???um?d th?t th? opposite play wants t? win and f?r th?t t? h????n, he h?? t? b? very rational with hi? ?r h?r b?h?vi?ur.M?r??v?r, ?l???r? ?r? ?w?r? that other players ?r? tr?ing t? ??timiz? th?ir payoffs ?nd beat th?m and thi? inf?rm? th?ir d??i?i?n m?king.First let’s get a ??r????tiv? of wh?t game th??r? is all aboutW?, humans cannot survive with?ut interacting with ?th?r hum?n?, and ir?ni??ll?, it sometimes ???m? th?t w? h?v? ?urviv?d despite th??? int?r??ti?n? in th? ??n?? th?t th??? int?r??ti?n? h?v? included w?r?, fighting, killing? ?t?.Pr?du?ti?n and exchange require cooperation b?tw??n individu?l? at ??m? l?v?l but th? same int?r??ti?n? m?? also lead to di???tr?u? confrontations. Hum?n hi?t?r? i? ?? mu?h a hi?t?r? of fight? ?nd w?r? ?? it i? a hi?t?r? ?f ?u?????ful ?????r?ti?n ?nd fri?nd?hi??.Many hum?n int?r??ti?n? carry the ??t?nti?l? of ?????r?ti?n ?nd h?rm?n? ?? w?ll ?? conflict, di?tru?t ?nd sometimes outright di???t?r.Ex?m?l?? in?lud?: r?l?ti?n?hi?? ?m?ng ??u?l??, ?ibling?, countries, m?n?g?m?nt ?nd labor uni?n?, n?ighb?r?, ?m?l???r ?nd ?m?l?????, and ?? on.On? ??n ?rgu? th?t th? in?r???ingl? ??m?l?x technologies, in?tituti?n?, ?nd ?ultur?l n?rm? that have ?xi?t?d in human ???i?ti?? have been there in ?rd?r t? facilitate ?nd r?gul?t? th??? int?r??ti?n?.F?r ?x?m?l?, internet t??hn?l?g? gr??tl? facilitates buyer-seller tr?n???ti?n?, but ?l?? ??m?li??t?? th?m furth?r by increasing ????rtuniti?? for ?h??ting ?nd fr?ud.Workers and managers h?v? usually opposing interests wh?n it ??m?? to w ?g?? ?nd working ??nditi?n?, ?nd labour uni?n? ?? w?ll ?? l?b?ur l?w? ?r?vid? ?h?nn?l? ?nd rul?? through which ?n? potential ??nfli?t between them can be ?ddr????d.T?n?’? ???id?ntWh?n ?n? of us (Steve) w?? a ??ll?g? ?tud?nt, hi? fri?nd T?n? ??u??d a minor traffic ???id?nt. W?’ll l?t him t?ll th? ?t?r?:The car ?f th? vi?tim, wh?m I’ll ??ll Vic, w?? slightly scraped. T?n? didn’t w?nt t? t?ll hi? in?ur?n?? company. The n?xt m?rning, T?n? ?nd I w?nt with Vi? t? vi?it ??m? b?d? shops. Th? u??h?t was th?t th? r???ir w?uld ???t $80.Tony ?nd I had lunch with a bottle of wine, ?nd thought ?v?r th? ?itu?ti?n. Vic’s ??r was far fr?m new ?nd h?d ???umul?t?d m?n? ??r????. R???iring the f?w th?t T?n? h?d caused w?uld improve th? ??r’? ?????r?n?? ?nl? a littl?.W? figur?d that if Tony ??nt Vi? a ?h??k f?r $80, Vi? w?uld ?r?b?bl? ju?t ???k?t it. Perhaps, we thought, Tony ?h?uld ??k t? see a receipt ?h?wing th?t th? r???ir? h?d ??tu?ll? b??n performed b?f?r? he ??nt Vi? the $80.A g?m? th? ?ri?t w?uld represent thi? ?itu?ti?n b? a game tr??. For definiteness, w?’ll ???um? that th? v?lu? to Vic ?f r???iring th? d?m?g? is $20.Explanation ?f th? game tree:T?n? goes first. H? h?? a ?h?i?? of two ??ti?n?: send Vic a ?h??k f?r $80, or d?m?nd a r???i?t ?r?ving that th? work h?? b??n d?n?.If T?n? sends a check, th? g?m? ?nd?. Tony i? ?ut $80; Vi? will no doubt k??? the m?n??, so he h?? g?in?d $80. W? r??r???nt th??? ????ff? b? th? ?rd?r?d ??ir (-80, 80); the fir?t numb?r i? Tony’s ????ff, the ????nd i? Vi?’?.If T?n? d?m?nd? a r???i?t, Vi? has a ?h?i?? ?f two ??ti?n?: r???ir the ??r and send T?n? th? r???i?t, ?r just forget th? wh?l? thing.If Vi? r???ir? th? car ?nd ??nd? T?n? th? r???i?t, th? g?m? ?nd?. T?n? ??nd? Vi? a ?h??k f?r $80, so he i? ?ut $80; Vi? u??? th? check t? ??? for the r???ir, ?? his g?in is $20, the v?lu? ?f the r???ir.If Vi? decides to forget th? wh?l? thing, h? ?nd Tony each ?nd u? with a g?in ?f 0Assuming that we h?v? ??rr??tl? sized u? th? ?itu?ti? n, w? ??? th?t if Tony demands a receipt, Vi? will have to d??id? between tw? ??ti?n?, one th?t giv?? him a ????ff ?f $20 ?nd one that giv?? him a payoff ?f 0. Vic will ?r??um?bl? ?h???? t? repair th? ??r, which giv?? him a better payoff. T?n? will th?n b? ?ut $80.Our ??n?lu?i?n was th?t Tony w?? out $80 wh?t?v?r he did. We did n?t like thi? game.When th? bottle w?? n??rl? finished, w? th?ught ?f a third ??ur?? ?f ??ti?n th?t T?n? could t?k?: ??nd Vi? a check for $40, ?nd t?ll Vi? th?t h? would ??nd th? r??t when Vi? provided a r???i?t ?h?wing th?t th? w?rk h?d ??tu?ll? b??n d?n?. The game tr?? n?w l??k?d lik? this:Most ?f th? g?m? tr?? l??k? lik? th? fir?t ?n?. H?w?v?r:If Tony t?k?? hi? new ??ti?n, ??nding Vic a check f?r $40 ?nd asking f?r a receipt, Vi? will have a ?h?i?? ?f two ??ti?n?: repair the ??r, ?r don’t.If Vic r???ir? the ??r, th? game ?nd?. Vi? will ??nd Tony a r???i?t, ?nd T?n? will send Vi? a ????nd check f?r $40. Tony will b? ?ut $80. Vi? will use b?th ?h??k? to pa y for th? r???ir, ?? he will h?v? a n?t g?in ?f $20, the v?lu? ?f the r???ir.If Vi? d??? n?t repair the ??r, ?nd ju?t ???k?t? th? the $40, th? g?m? ends. T?n? i? ?ut $40, ?nd Vi? h?? g?in?d $40. Ag?in ???uming th?t w? have ??rr??tl? ?iz?d u? th? ?itu?ti?n, w? ??? th?t if T?n? sends Vi? a check f?r $40 and asks f?r a r???i?t, Vic’s best ??ur?? ?f action i? t? keep th? m?n?? ?nd n?t m?k? th? repair. Thu? T?n? is ?ut only $40.T?n? ??nt Vic a ?h??k for $40, t?ld him h?’d ??nd th? r??t when he saw a receipt, ?nd n?v?r h??rd from Vi? ?g?in.E??n?mi??, sociology, ????h?l?g?, ?nd ??liti??l ??i?n?? ?r? ?ll d?v?t?d to studying hum?n b?h?vi?ur in different realms of social life.H?w?v?r, in m?n? in?t?n??? th?? tr??t individu?l? in i??l?ti?n, f?r convenience if n?t f?r ?n?thing ?l??. In ?th?r w?rd?, th?? ???um? th?t to understand ?n? individual’s b?h?vi?r.It i? safe to ???um? that his or her b?h?vi?r d??? not h?v? a significant ?ff??t ?n ?th?r individu?l?. In some cases, and d???nding u??n th? ?u??ti?n ?n? i? ??king, this assumption m?? b? w?rr?nt?d.For ?x?m?l?, wh?t a small f?rm?r in a l???l market, l?t’? ??? in M?nt?n?, ?h?rg?? for wheat i? n?t likely t? have ?n effect on the w?rld wh??t prices.Simil?rl?, th? probability th?t m? vote will ?h?ng? th? ?ut??m? ?f th? U.S. presidential ?l??ti?n? is n?gligibl? small.So, if we ?r? interested in the w?rld wh??t ?ri?? or th? r??ult ?f th? ?r??id?nti?l ?l??ti?n?, w? m?? ??f?l? ???um? th?t ?n? individu?l ??t? ?r b?h?vi?r will n?t ?ff??t th? outcome.In many cases, however, thi? ???um?ti?n m?? l??d to wrong ??n?lu?i?n?. F?r ?x?m?l?, h?w mu?h ?ur f?rm?r in M?nt?n? ?h?rg??, ??m??r?d t? th? ?th?r f?rm?r? in Montana, ??rt?inl? ?ff??t? h?w mu?h h? ?r ?h? and other f?rm?r? make. If ?ur f?rm?r ??t? a ?ri?? that i? l?w?r th?n th? prices set by th? ?th?r f?rm?r? in th? local m?rk?t, ?h? w?uld ??ll m?r? than th? others, and vi?? versa.Th?r?f?r?, if we ???um? th?t they d?t?rmin? th?ir prices with?ut t?king thi? ?ff??t int? ????unt, w? a re not lik?l? to get ?n?wh?r? n??r und?r?t?nding their b?h?vi?r.Simil?rl?, the v?t? of ?n? individual m?? r?di??ll? ?h?ng? the ?ut??m? ?f voting in ?m?ll ??mmitt??? and ???uming th?t they v?t? in ign?r?n?? ?f th?t f??t i? likely t? be mi?l??ding.Aft?r ?ll, ?v?n ?du??t?d ??n?t?r? ??m?tim?? turn their votes b???d on ?n? ??r??n’? idea.S? what i? g?m? th??r??Game th??r? i? ?x??tl? th??? interactions within a gr?u? of individuals (?r g?v?rnm?nt?, firm?, ?t?.) wh?r? th? actions ?f ???h individual have ?n ?ff??t on th? ?ut??m? th?t i? of interest t? everybody.Yet, thi? is n?t ?n?ugh f?r a ?itu?ti?n t? be a ?r???r ?ubj??t ?f game th??r?: th? w?? th?t individu?l? act has to be ?tr?t?gi?, i.?., they ?h?uld b? ?w?r? ?f the f??t th?t th?ir ??ti?n? ?ff??t others.Th? fact th?t m? ??ti?n? h?v? ?n ?ff??t on th? ?ut??m? does n?t n??????ril? translate t? strategic b?h?vi?ur if I ?m n?t aware ?f th?t f??t. Therefore, w? say th?t game th??r? ?tudi?? strategic int?r??ti?n within a group of individuals .B? strategic int?r??ti?n w? m??n th?t individu?l? kn?w th?t th?ir ??ti?n? will have an ?ff??t on th? ?ut??m? and th?n ??t? accordingly. It b??i??ll? m??n? acting in such a w?? t? m?ni?ul?t? ?n ?ut??m? in ??ur favour. Look ?t th? ?x?m?l? ?b?v?â€"“J?hn’? ???id?nt”Having determined the t???? ?f situations th?t g?m? th??r? d??l? with, w? h?v? to now di??u?? h?w it ?n?l???? these ?itu?ti?n?.Like ?n? ?th?r th??r?, the objective ?f g?m? th??r? i? t? ?rg?niz? ?ur knowledge ?nd in?r???? ?ur understanding of th? outside w?rld.A scientific th??r? tri?? t? abstract th? m??t ????nti?l aspects ?f a giv?n ?itu?ti?n, analyze them using ??rt?in ???um?ti?n? ?nd ?r???dur??, and ?t th? end derive ??m? g?n?r?l ?rin?i?l?? and ?r?di?ti?n? th?t can b? ???li?d to individual in?t?n???.F?r it to h?v? ?n? ?r?di?tiv? ??w?r, game theory has t? assume some rules according t? whi?h individu?l? m?? ??t. If w? d? n?t d???rib? how individu?l? behave, what th?ir ?bj??tiv?? ?r? ?nd h?w they tr? to ??hi?v? th??? ?bj??tiv?? w? ??nn?t derive ?n? ?r?di?ti?n? at ?ll in a giv?n ?itu?ti?n.F?r example, ?n? w?uld get ??m?l?t?l? diff?r?nt ?r?di?ti?n? r?g?rding th? ?ri?? of wh??t in a local m?rk?t if one ???um?? th?t farmers simply flip a ??in and ?h???? b?tw??n $1 ?nd $2 a pound ??m??r?d t? if ?n? assumes they tr? t? m?k? as mu?h m?n?? ?? ????ibl?.Therefore, t? bring ??m? discipline t? th? ?n?l??i? ?n? has t? intr?du?? ??m? ?tru?tur? in terms of th? rules ?f the game. Th? most important, and m??b? ?n? of th? m??t controversial, assumption ?f game theory whi?h brings ?b?ut this di??i?lin? i? th?t individuals ?r? rational.Rationality im?li?? that individu?l? know the strategies ?v?il?bl? t? ???h ?f th?m, h?v? ??m?l?t? and ??n?i?t?nt ?r?f?r?n??? over ????ibl? outcomes, ?nd th?? ?r? ?w?r? ?f th??? ?r?f?r?n???.Furth?rm?r?, they ??n determine the b??t strategy f?r themselves ?nd flawlessly im?l?m?nt it.If t?k?n literally, th? ???um?ti?n of rationality i? ??rt?inl? ?n unr??li?ti? ?n?, ?nd if applied to ??r ti?ul?r ????? it m?? ?r?du?? r??ult? that are ?t ?dd? with r??lit?. We ?h?uld fir?t note th?t game th??ri?t? ?r? ?w?r? of th? limit?ti?n? im????d b? this ???um?ti?n ?nd th?r? is ?n active r????r?h area ?tud?ing th? implications ?f l??? d?m?nding f?rm? ?f rationality, ??ll?d bounded r?ti?n?lit?.It i? n?t enough th?t I know th?t m? ??ti?n?, as w?ll ?? ??ur?, affect the outcome, but I mu?t ?l?? kn?w th?t you kn?w this fact. T?k? th? example ?f tw? wheat f?rm?r? b?th farmer A and B kn?w th?t their respective ?h?i??? of ?ri??? will ?ff??t their profits f?r the d??.But suppose, A d??? not kn?w that B kn?w? thi?.Now, from the ??r????tiv? of f?rm?r A, f?rm?r B i? ??m?l?t?l? ign?r?nt of what is g?ing ?n in th? market ?nd h?n?? f?rm?r B might ??t any ?ri??.Thi? makes f?rm?r A’? d??i?i?n quite difficult in itself because he h?? n? r?ti?n?l ground t? stand on to compete with f?rm?r B b???u?? f?rm?r B ??uld set ?n? price (he could set a ?ri?? lower than the ???t ?ri?? whi?h will m?k? it imposs ible f?r f?rm?r A t? compete).T? model th? ?itu?ti?n more r??li?ti??ll?, w? then have t? assume th?t th?? b?th kn?w th?t th?? kn?w th?t their prices will affect their ?r?fit?.On? ??tu?ll? h?? t? ??ntinu? in this f??hi?n ?nd assume th?t the rul?? ?f the game, in?luding h?w ??ti?n? ?ff??t th? ??rti?i??nt? ?nd individuals’ r?ti?n?lit?, ?r? ??mm?n kn?wl?dg?.A fact “X” i? common kn?wl?dg? if everybody knows it, if ?v?r?b?d? kn?w? that ?v?r?b?d? kn?w? it, if everybody kn?w? th?t ?v?r?b?d? kn?w? th?t ?v?r?b?d? kn?w? it, ?nd so on.Thi? has ??m? philosophical im?li??ti?n? ?nd is ?ubj??t t? a l?t ?f controversy, but f?r the m??t part w? will ?v?id th??? di??u??i?n? and take it as giv?n.In sum, we m?? define g?m? theory ?? f?ll?w?: Game th??r? i? a ???t?m?ti? study ?f ?tr?t?gi? interactions ?m?ng r?ti?n?l individu?l?.It? limit?ti?n? ??id?, game theory h?? b??n fruitfull? ???li?d to m?n? situations in th? r??lm ?f ???n?mi??, political ??i?n??, bi?l?g?, l?w, ?t?.In the rest ?f thi? ?rti?l? , w? will illu?tr?t? th? m?in ideas ?nd ??n???t? of g?m? th??r? ?nd ??m? ?f it? ???li??ti?n? using simple ?x?m?l??.An ?x?m?l?Su????? th?t B??ing ?nd Airbu? are asked t? ?ubmit ???l?d bid? on th? ?ri?? ?f t?n jet ?irlin?r? t? a f?r?ign n?ti?n?l ?irlin?. B?th ??m??ni?? d?ubt that th?? will ??m??t? in ?imil?r w??? in th? futur?. Both companies ??n ??l??t ?ith?r a high price ?r a l?w price.If ?n? ??m??n? bid? high and th? ?th?r bids l?w, the ?rd?r goes t? th? low bidder; if b?th ??m??ni?? submit th? same bid, they ??lit the order. E??h firm h?? the capacity t? build ?ll t?n ?ir?l?n??.B?th companies privately ?h???? their bids ?t th? ??m? tim?. Th? r??ulting ????ff? (profits ?x- pressed in milli?n? ?f dollars) d???nd ?n both firms’ choices.L?w ?ri??â€"100 milli?n each High ?ri??â€"150 million ???hCONCEPTS IN GAME THEORYDominant Str?t?gi?? A d?min?nt strategy ?xi?t? wh?n it i? optimal for a firm t? ?h???? th?t ?tr?t?g? n? m?tt?r what its rival d???. In the ?x?m?l? above, b?th firm? have a d?min?nt ?tr?t?g?â€"?h???? the l?w ?ri??.To illu?tr?t?, consider B??ing’? position. If Airbu? chooses a high ?ri??, B??ing ???tur?? th? entire ?rd?r b? submitting a l?w ?ri??. The resulting payoff of $1 billi?n is high?r th?n the payoff ?f $750 milli?n if both firm? ?ri?? high ?nd ??lit th? order.If Airbus ?h????? a l?w ?ri??, B??ing i? clearly b?tt?r ?ff t? ?ri?? l?w ?nd ??lit the order instead of l??ing ?ut entirely. It? alternative is t? ?ri?? high and sell n? ?l?n??.Examining the r?w?, the ??m? l?gi? h?ld? for Airbus. Giv?n th??? strong incentives, th? likely ?ut??m? is f?r b?th firms to ?ubmit a l?w ?ri??. N?t? th?t the firm? w?uld b? better ?ff if th?? j?intl? were t? ?ubmit high ?ri???. But thi? ?ut??m? i? unlikely with?ut r????t?d int?r??ti?n?. (Thi? ?r?bl?m h?? the same ?tru?tur? ?? th? well-known prisoners’ Dilemma)Nash Equilibrium M?n? ?f th? w?rld’? markets ?r? lik? the ??mm?r?i?l ?ir?r?ft industry in that th?r? ?r? a f?w l?rg? firms wh? ?r? th? m?j?r players. I n thi? type of market, it i? g?n?r?ll? important f?r m?n?g?r? t? consider riv?l?’ r????n??? wh?n making m?j?r decisions.Firms d? n?t always h?v? d?min?nt ?tr?t?gi??. For in?t?n??, suppose in ?ur ?x?m?l?, the U.S. g?v?rnm?nt ?l???? ?r???ur? ?n th? foreign ??untr? to have its n?ti?n?l ?irlin? purchase planes fr?mB??ing (governments ??tu?ll? have d?n? thi? for their d?m??ti? producers). Th? ?irlin? still ??lit? th? ?rd?r when the bid? are the ??m? ?nd awards B??ing th? entire ?rd?r if B??ing is th? low bidd?r. But du? t? this ??liti??l ?r???ur?, if B??ing bids high and l???? th? bid, the ?irlin? will bu? f?ur ?l?n?? fr?m B??ing ?t th? high ?ri?? on a ?id? deal ?ft?r purchasing the t?n ?l?n?? from Airbu? ?t the low ?ri??.Ch???ing a low price i? still a d?min?nt ?tr?t?g? for Airbus. Boeing, h?w?v?r, does not have a d?min?nt ?tr?t?g?. If Airbu? ?ri??? high, it i? ??tim?l f?r Boeing to ?ri?? l?w t? capture th? entire ?rd?r, wh?r??? if Airbu? ?ri??? l?w, it is b?tt?r for Boeing to price h igh ?nd make the side deal.When d?min?nt strategies d? not exist, th? ??n???t ?f a Nash equilibrium is useful in ?r?di?ting th? ?ut??m?. A Nash equilibrium i? a set ?f ?tr?t?gi?? (?r ??ti?n?) in whi?h each firm i? doing th? b??t it ??n, giv?n the ??ti?n? of it? rival.Th? ??mbin?ti?n ?f a l?w Airbu? ?ri?? ?nd a high Boeing price i? a Nash ??uilibrium. Neither firm w?uld w?nt t? ?h?ng? it? ?ri?? given the price ?ubmitt?d by th? ?th?r firmA ??rti?ul?r problem might have multiple Nash ??uilibri?Nash equilibria ?r? not n??????ril? th? ?ut??m?? th?t maximize the j?int payoff ?f the ?l???r?.F?r in?t?n??, fr?m th? ?x?m?l? ?b?v?, th? ?ut??m? where both firm? ?ubmit l?w prices i? a N??h ??uilibrium.Y?t b?th firms w?uld b? b?tt?r ?ff if th?? j?intl? ?ubmitt?d high prices.M?n?g?m?nt ImplicationsTh? ??w?r of a Nash equilibrium t? ?r?di?t the ?ut??m? in strategic ?itu?ti?n? ?t?m? fr?m the f??t th?t N??h ??uilibri? ?r? ??lf-?nf?r?ing: They are stable ?ut??m??. For instance, if Boeing can forecast Airbu?’? ?h?i?? (??rh??? b???u?? it und?r?t?nd? that Airbu? has a dominant ?tr?t?g?), it i? ??tim?l for Boeing t? choose it? ??uilibrium ??ti?n, a high ?ri??.And Airbus h?? n? in??ntiv? t? ?v?id its ??uilibrium choice, a l?w ?ri??. Thu?, ?v?n if b?th firms can forecast the outcome, neither firm h?? ?n in??ntiv? to ?h???? ?n? other ??ti?n.Alth?ugh th? id?? ?f a N??h ??uilibrium i? ?uit? useful, it is n?t ?? ??w?rful in ?r?di?ting the ?ut??m?? ?f strategic int?r??ti?n? ?? th? ??n???t of a dominant ?tr?t?g?. Wh?n dominant ?tr?t?gi?? exist, th?r? ?r? ?tr?ng ?riv?t? in??ntiv?? t? choose them r?g?rdl??? of wh?t th? ?th?r player d???.Thu?, it i? ?uit? predictable th?t riv?l? will ?h???? d?min?nt ?tr?t?gi??. With a Nash ??uilibrium, your best choice g?n?r?ll? i? ??nting?nt ?n wh?t you ?x???t ??ur rival t? do.In m?n? ????? it i? r????n?bl? to expect that a Nash ??uilibrium will occur. Thi? is more likely to b? true wh?n th? rivals have m?r? ?x??ri?n?? in similar ?tr?t?gi? ?r?bl?m?, h?v? b? tt?r inf?rm?ti?n ?b?ut ???h ?th?r, or wh?n the N??h equilibrium is what i? ??ll?d a n?tur?l f???l ??int.F?r example, ??n?id?r the ?r?bl?m again.If Boeing has r????n?bl? inf?rm?ti?n ?b?ut potential payoffs ?nd Airbu?’? l??k ?f ??liti??l ??w?r within th? specific country (it understands that th?r? is a close w?rking r?l?ti?n?hi? between th? l???l ?nd U.S. governments), it will r??liz? th?t Airbu? has a d?min?nt strategy t? ?ubmit a l?w ?ri??.B??ing ??rr????ndingl? will ?h???? a high priceâ€"the N??h equilibrium.Wh?n riv?l? kn?w littl? about th? setting ?r ???h ?th?r ?nd wh?n th?r? i? n?t a n?tur?l focal point, ?ut??m?? other than N??h equilibria (n?n-??uilibrium ?ut??m??) ?r? m?r? lik?l? t? ???ur.Str?t?g?It i? th? ?r?-d?t?rmin?d rul? b? whi?h ???h ?l???r decides hi? ??ur?? ?f action fr?m hi? li?t ?v?il?bl? t? him. How one course ?f action i? selected out of v?ri?u? ??ur??? ?v?il?bl? t? him i? known ?? ?tr?t?g? ?f the g?m?.T???? ?f Str?t?g?G?n?r?ll? tw? types ?f strategy ?r? ?m?l???d Pur? Str?t?g?: It i? th? predetermined ??ur?? ?f action to b? ?m?l???d by th? ?l???r. The ?l???r? kn?w it in ?dv?n??. It i? usually r??r???nt?d b? a numb?r with which the course ?f ??ti?n is ?????i?t?d.Mixed Str?t?g?: In mix?d ?tr?t?g? the ?l???r d??id?? hi? course ?f ??ti?n in accordance with some fix?d probability distribution. Pr?b?bilit? ?r? ?????i?t?d with ???h course ?f ??ti?n ?nd th? ??l??ti?n i? done ?? ??r th??? ?r?b?biliti??. In mix?d ?tr?t?g? th? ????n?nt ??nn?t be sure ?f th? ??ur?? ?f ??ti?n to be t?k?n ?n ?n? ??rti?ul?r ?????i?n.Decision ?f a G?m?In G?m? theory, best ?tr?t?g? for ???h ?l???r i? d?t?rmin?d ?n th? b??i? of ??m? rul?. Sin?? both th? ?l???r? ?r? ?x???t?d to b? rational in th?ir ???r???h this is known ?? th? ?rit?ri? ?f ??tim?lit?.Each player lists the ????ibl? ?ut??m?? fr?m hi? ??ti?n ?nd ??l??t? the b??t ??ti?n t? ??hi?v? hi? ?bj??tiv??.This criteria of ??tim?lit? is ?x?r????d ?? M?ximin f?r the m?ximi?ing ?l???r ?nd Minim?x f?r the minimi?ing player.Th? Prisoners Dil?mm? Th?r? ?r? m?n? situation in lif? wh?r? ??u ?h???? to do ??m?thing th?t is b??t f?r you, r?th?r than best f?r th? group, b???u?? ??u h?v? n? way ?f estimating h?w ??mmitt?d the ?th?r ????l? ?r? t?w?rd? th? gr?u? int?r??t?.Y?u kn?w that the ?ut??m? ?f being ??lfi?h can ??t?nti?ll? be b?d for ?v?r??n?, but ??u ?r?f?r th?t ?v?r??n? gets screwed r?th?r th?n b?ing the ?v?rl? ??n?id?r?t? gu? ?v?r??n? ??r?w?.F?r ?x?m?l?, if I h?v? no id?? if ??u are g?ing t? pay taxes, why w?uld i bother t? ??? t?x?? f?r th? new public swimming pool in whi?h you will di? your ?h????k?t? int??I would prefer th?t there b? n? swimming ???l ?t all th?n t? b? th? dumm? wh? pays f?r ?th?r ????l?? ?tuff.Suppose ?n th? ?th?r hand, th?r? ?r? ?l?nt? ?f l?w ?biding ?itiz?n? out th?r? ???ing t?x??, then why not avoid ???ing taxes so I dip my own ??? in th? swimming pool with?ut ???ing for it!   In ?th?r w?rd?, ??ting ?nti-???i?l m?k? ??n?? f?r me ??r??n?ll? r?g?rdl??? of h?w ??n?id?r?t? ?th?r people ? r?.The prisoners dil?mm? i? a v?r? popular example of a two-person game of strategic int?r??ti?n, ?nd its a common intr?du?t?r? ?x?m?l? in many g?m? th??r? textbooks. Th? l?gi? ?f th? g?m? i? ?im?l?:Th? tw? players in th? game have b??n ???u??d ?f a ?rim? and h?v? b??n placed in ????r?t? r??m? so that th?? cannot communicate with ?n? ?n?th?r. (In other words, th?? cant ??llud? ?r commit t? ?????r?ting.)Each player i? asked ind???nd?ntl? whether h? i? g?ing to ??nf??? t? th? ?rim? ?r r?m?in ?il?nt.B???u?? each of the tw? ?l???r? h?? tw? possible ??ti?n? (?tr?t?gi??), there ?r? f?ur possible ?ut??m?? t? th? g?m?.If both ?l???r? confess, they each get sent to j?il, but f?r f?w?r ???r? th?n if ?n? of th? ?l???r? g?t r?tt?d ?ut b? th? ?th?r.If one ?l???r confesses ?nd th? ?th?r remains ?il?nt, th? silent player g?t? punished severely whil? th? player who ??nf????d g?t? t? go fr??.If b?th players r?m?in ?il?nt, they ???h get a punishment th?t is l??? ??v?r? th?n if they b?th confess.In th ? g?m? itself, ?uni?hm?nt? (?nd r?w?rd?, where relevant) are r??r???nt?d b? utility numb?r?.Positive numb?r? represent g??d ?ut??m??, n?g?tiv? numbers r??r???nt b?d ?ut??m??, ?nd ?n? outcome i? b?tt?r th?n ?n?th?r if th? numb?r associated with it i? greater.Analysing the Pl???r? O?ti?n?On?? a game i? d?fin?d, the n?xt ?t?? in analysing th? game i? to ?????? th? ?l???r? ?tr?t?gi?? ?nd try t? und?r?t?nd h?w th? ?l???r? ?r? likely to b?h?v?. E??n?mi?t? m?k? a f?w assumptions when they ?n?l??? games: first, they assume th?t b?th ?l???r? are ?w?r? ?f the ????ff? b?th f?r th?m??lv?? and f?r th? ?th?r ?l???r, ?nd, ????nd, th?? ???um? th?t both ?l???r? ?r? l??king to rationally m?ximiz? their ?wn ????ff fr?m the g?m?.One ???? initi?l ???r???h i? t? l??k ?t their d?min?nt strategies- ?tr?t?gi?? that are best r?g?rdl??? ?f what ?tr?t?g? th? ?th?r ?l???r chooses. In the ?x?m?l? above, choosing t? ??nf??? i? a d?min?nt ?tr?t?g? f?r both ?l???r?:Confess i? b?tt?r for ?l???r 1 if ?l???r 2 ?h????? t? confess ?in??C?nf??? i? b?tt?r for player 1 if ?l???r 2 ?h????? to r?m?in ?il?ntC?nf??? is better f?r ?l???r 2 if ?l???r 1 ?h????? to ??nf???Confess is b?tt?r f?r ?l???r 2 if ?l???r 1 ?h????? to r?m?in ?il?ntW?rr?n Buff?tt ?r?vid?? ??m? illumin?ti?n ?? t? how the Prisoners Dilemma plays out in business in th? 1985 Berkshire Hathaway Annu?l r???rtTh? domestic t?xtil? indu?tr? operates in a commodity bu?in???, ??m??ting in a w?rld market in whi?h substantial ?x???? ?????it? ?xi?t?.Much ?f the trouble w? experienced w?? ?ttribut?bl?, b?th dir??tl? ?nd indir??tl?, t? ??m??titi?n fr?m f?r?ign ??untri?? wh??? w?rk?r? ?r? paid a small fr??ti?n of the U.S. minimum wage.But th?t in n? way m??n? that ?ur l?b?r f?r?? deserves any bl?m? f?r ?ur ?l??ing. In fact, in ??m??ri??n with employees ?f American indu?tr? generally, ?ur w?rk?r? w?r? ???rl? ??id, as h?? been th? ???? throughout th? t?xtil? bu?in???. In ??ntr??t n?g?ti?ti?n?, union l??d?r? and members w?r? sensitive t? ?ur di??dv?nt?g?? u? ???t ???iti?n and did n?t ?u?h f?r unrealistic w?g? in?r????? ?r un?r?du?tiv? work ?r??ti???.T? the contrary, they tri?d just ?? h?rd ?? w? did t? keep us competitive. Even during our li?uid?ti?n ??ri?d they ??rf?rm?d superbly. (Ir?ni??ll?, w? w?uld h?v? b??n b?tt?r off fin?n?i?ll? if ?ur uni?n h?d b?h?v?d unr????n?bl? some ???r? ?g?; we th?n w?uld h?v? recognized th? im????ibl? future th?t we faced, ?r?m?tl? closed down, ?nd ?v?id?d ?ignifi??nt futur? l?????.)Ov?r the ???r?, we h?d th? ??ti?n of m?king large capital expenditures in the t?xtil? operation th?t would h?v? allowed us t? ??m?wh?t reduce variable ???t?. E??h proposal to do ?? looked like an imm?di?t? winn?r.Measured b? ?t?nd?rd return-on-investment t??t?, in f??t, th??? ?r?????l? usually ?r?mi??d gr??t?r ???n?mi? benefits than w?uld have r??ult?d fr?m ??m??r?bl? expenditures in ?ur highly-profitable candy ?nd n?w?????r businesses.But th? promised b?n?fit? fr?m these t?xtil? investments were illusory. M?n? ?f ?ur compe titors, both d?m??ti? and foreign, were stepping u? t? th? same kind ?f expenditures ?nd, once enough companies did so, their reduced ???t? b???m? the b???lin? f?r r?du??d ?ri??? indu?tr?-wid?.Vi?w?d individually, each ??m??n?? capital investment d??i?i?n ?????r?d ???t-?ff??tiv? ?nd rational; vi?w?d collectively, the d??i?i?n? n?utr?liz?d each ?th?r ?nd w?r? irrational (ju?t ?? h????n? when each ??r??n watching a ??r?d? decides h? can ??? a littl? better if h? ?t?nd? ?n ti?t???). After ???h r?und of inv??tm?nt, ?ll th? ?l???r? had m?r? m?n?? in th? game ?nd returns r?m?in?d ?n?mi?.Thu?, w? f???d a mi??r?bl? ?h?i??: hug? capital inv??tm?nt would h?v? helped to k??? ?ur t?xtil? bu?in??? alive, but would h?v? l?ft u? with terrible returns on ?v?r-gr?wing amounts ?f ???it?l. Aft?r the investment, m?r??v?r, th? f?r?ign ??m??titi?n would ?till h?v? r?t?in?d a m?j?r, continuing ?dv?nt?g? in labor costs.A refusal to inv??t, h?w?v?r, would m?k? us in?r???ingl? n?n-??m??titiv?, ?v?n m???ur?d ?g?in?t d?m??ti? textile manufacturers. I ?lw??? thought m???lf in th? ???iti?n d???rib?d by W??d? All?n in ?n? of hi? m?vi??: “M?r? th?n any other tim? in hi?t?r?, mankind faces a crossroads. One ??th l??d? t? d????ir and utt?r h???l???n???, th? other t? t?t?l extinction. Let us ?r?? we h?v? th? wisdom to choose ??rr??tl?.”For an understanding of h?w th? t?-inv??t-?r-n?t-t?-inv??t dil?mm? ?l??? ?ut in a ??mm?dit? business, it i? instructive to l??k at Burlingt?n Industries, b? far the l?rg??t U.S. t?xtil? ??m??n? both 21 ???r? ago ?nd n?w. In 1964 Burlington h?d ??l?? ?f $1.2 billion against ?ur $50 milli?n.It had ?tr?ngth? in b?th di?tributi?n ?nd ?r?du?ti?n that we ??uld n?v?r h??? t? m?t?h ?nd ?l??, ?f ??ur??, had ?n earnings r???rd far ?u??ri?r t? ?ur?. It? stock sold ?t 60 ?t th? ?nd of 1964; ours w?? 13.Burlingt?n m?d? a decision t? ?ti?k t? th? t?xtil? business, and in 1985 had sales of about $2.8 billion. During th? 1964-85 ??ri?d, th? ??m??n? m?d? capital ?x??nditur?? of about $3 billion, f?r m?r? than any ?th?r U.S. t?xtil? company and m?r? th?n $200-per-share on th?t $60 ?t??k.A very l?rg? part ?f th? ?x??nditur??, I ?m ?ur?, w?? d?v?t?d to cost im?r?v?m?nt ?nd ?x??n?i?n. Given Burlingtons b??i? ??mmitm?nt t? stay in t?xtil??, I w?uld ?l?? surmise th?t th? companys ???it?l decisions were quite r?ti?n?l.N?v?rth?l???, Burlington has l??t ??l?? volume in r??l d?ll?r? ?nd h?? far l?w?r returns ?n ??l?? and ??uit? now th?n 20 years ago. S?lit 2-f?r-1 in 1965, th? ?t??k n?w ??ll? at 34 â€" on ?n ?dju?t?d b??i?, ju?t a littl? ?v?r it? $60 price in 1964. M??nwhil?, th? CPI h?? m?r? th?n tri?l?d.Th?r?f?r?, each share ??mm?nd? about ?n?-third the ?ur?h??ing ??w?r it did ?t th? end ?f 1964. Regular divid?nd? h?v? b??n paid but th??, t??, h?v? ?hrunk ?ignifi??ntl? in ?ur?h??ing ??w?r.This d?v??t?ting ?ut??m? for th? ?h?r?h?ld?r? indicates what can happen wh?n much brain ??w?r and ?n?rg? are ???li?d t? a f?ult? ?r?mi??. The ?itu?ti?n is suggestive ?f S?mu?l J?hn??n? h?r??: “A horse that ??n count t? ten is a r?m?rk?bl? horse â€" n?t a remarkable m?th?m?ti?i?n.” Lik?wi??, a t?xtil? ??m??n? that allocates ???it?l brilli?ntl? within it? indu?tr? is a r?m?rk?bl? t?xtil? company â€" but n?t a r?m?rk?bl? bu?in???.My ??n?lu?i?n from m? ?wn ?x??ri?n??? ?nd fr?m mu?h ?b??rv?ti?n ?f ?th?r bu?in????? i? th?t a good managerial record (m???ur?d b? economic r?turn?) i? far m?r? a function ?f wh?t business boat ??u g?t int? th?n it i? ?f h?w ?ff??tiv?l? ??u r?w (though int?llig?n?? ?nd ?ff?rt h?l? considerably, ?f ??ur??, in ?n? bu?in???, g??d ?r bad).S?m? ???r? ago I wrote: “When a m?n?g?m?nt with a r??ut?ti?n for brilli?n?? t??kl?? a bu?in??? with a r??ut?ti?n for ???r fund?m?nt?l ???n?mi??, it i? th? reputation ?f th? bu?in??? that r?m?in? int??t.” N?thing h?? since ?h?ng?d m? ??int ?f view ?n that matter. Sh?uld ??u find yourself in a chronically-leaking b??t, ?n?rg? d?v?t?d to changing v????l? i? likely to b? m?r? ?r?du?tiv? th?n ?n?rg? d?v?t?d t? ??t?hing l??k?.GAME THEORY STRATEGIESThe ?ri??n?r? dilemma l??? th? f?und?ti?n f?r advanced game th??r? ?tr?t?gi??, ?f whi?h th? ???ul?r ones in?lud?:M?t?hing P?nni??This i? a z?r?-?um g?m? th?t inv?lv?? tw? ?l???r? (??ll them Player A ?nd Player B) ?imult?n??u?l? placing a ??nn? ?n th? t?bl?, with th? ????ff d???nding ?n whether the ??nni?? m?t?h.If both pennies ?r? h??d? ?r t?il?, Pl???r A wins ?nd k???? Player B’? ??nn?. If they do n?t match, Player B wins and keeps Pl???r A’s ??nn?.D??dl??kThis i? a social dil?mm? ???n?ri? like ?ri??n?r’? dilemma in th?t tw? ?l???r? ??n ?ith?r cooperate ?r d?f??t (i.?. not ?????r?t?). In deadlock, if Pl???r A ?nd Player B both cooperate, they ???h g?t a ????ff ?f 1, and if they b?th defect, th?? ???h g?t a ????ff of 2.But if Pl???r A ?????r?t?? ?nd Pl???r B defects, th?n A g?t? a payoff ?f 0 ?nd B g?t? a ????ff ?f 3. In th? payoff di?gr?m b?l?w, th? fir?t numeral in th? cells (?) thr?ugh (d) r??r???nt? Player A’s ????ff, ?nd the ????nd num?r?l i? th?t of Player B:D??dl??k P???ff M?trixPl???r BC????r?t?D?f??tPlayer ACooperate(?) 1, 1(b) 0, 3Defect(?) 3, 0(d) 2, 2D??dl??k diff?r? fr?m ?ri??n?r’? dilemma in th?t th? action of gr??t??t mutual benefit (i.?. b?th defect) i? also th? d?min?nt ?tr?t?g?. A d?min?nt ?tr?t?g? f?r a ?l???r i? d?fin?d ?? one th?t produces th? high??t payoff ?f any available strategy, r?g?rdl??? of th? strategies employed by the ?th?r players.A ??mm?nl? ?it?d example ?f deadlock is th?t ?f two nuclear ??w?r? tr?ing t? r???h ?n agreement to ?limin?t? th?ir ?r??n?l? ?f nu?l??r bombs. In thi? case, cooperation implies adhering t? the ?gr??m?nt, whil? defection means secretly reneging on th? ?gr??m?nt ?nd r?t?ining th? nu?l??r arsenal.Th? b??t ?ut??m? f?r ?ith?r n?ti?n, unf?rtun?t?l?, i? t? renege on the agreement and r?t?in the nu?l??r ??ti?n whil? the ?th?r n?ti?n ?limin?t?? it? ?r??n?l, ?in?? thi? will give the f?rm?r a tr?m?nd?u? hidd?n ?dv?nt?g? ?v?r the latter if w?r ?v?r breaks ?ut b?tw??n th? tw?.The ????nd-b??t ??ti?n is for b?th t? defect or n?t cooperate, ?in?? this retains th?ir ?t?tu? as nu?l??r ??w?r?.C?urn?t CompetitionThi? m?d?l is ?l?? ??n???tu?ll? ?imil?r t? prisoner’s dil?mm?, and i? n?m?d after Fr?n?h mathematician Augustin Cournot, wh? intr?du??d it in 1838.Th? m??t ??mm?n application ?f th? C?urn?t m?d?l i? in d???ribing a du???l? ?r two main producers in a market.For ?x?m?l?, ???um? companies A ?nd B ?r?du?? an id?nti??l ?r?du?t and can produce high ?r l?w ?u?ntiti??. If th?? b?th cooperate ?nd ?gr?? t? ?r?du?? ?t l?w levels, th?n limit?d supply will tr?n?l?t? into a high price f?r th? ?r?du?t ?n th? market and ?ub?t?nti?l ?r?fit? f?r b?th ??m??ni??.On th? other h?nd, if they d?f??t ?nd ?r?du?? ?t high l?v?l?, th? m?rk?t will be swamped ?nd r??ult in a l?w price for the product and ??n???u?ntl? l?w?r ?r?fit? f?r both. But if one cooperates (i.e. produces ?t low l?v?l?) and th? ?th?r d?f??t? (i.?. ?urr??titi?u?l? produces ?t high l?v?l?), then th? former ju?t br??k? ?v?n whil? the latter ??rn? a high?r profit th?n if th?? b?th ?????r?t?.The ????ff m?trix f?r companies A ?nd B is shown (figures r??r???nt ?r?fit in milli?n? ?f dollars). Thu?, if A ?????r?t?? ?nd produces ?t l?w l?v?l? while B d?f??t? and produces ?t high levels, th? ????ff i? as shown in ??ll (b)â€"br??k-?v?n for ??m??n? A ?nd $7 million in ?r?fit? for ??m??n? B.Cournot Payoff MatrixCompany BC????r?t?D?f??tCompany ACooperate(?) 4, 4(b) 0, 7Defect(?) 7, 0(d) 2, 2C??rdin?ti?nIn coordination, ?l???r? ??rn higher ????ff? when th?? select th? ??m? course ?f action.A? ?n example, consider tw? t??hn?l?g? gi?nt? wh? ?r? d??iding between intr?du?ing a r?di??l new t??hn?l?g? in memory ?hi?? th?t ??uld ??rn th?m hundreds ?f milli?n? in ?r?fit?, or a revised v?r?i?n ?f an ?ld?r t??hn?l?g? that would ??rn them much l???.If ?nl? ?n? ??m??n? d??id?? t? go ?h??d with the new t??hn?l?g?, rate ?f ?d??ti?n by ??n?um?r? w?uld b? significantly l?w?r, ?nd ?? a r??ult, it w? uld ??rn l??? than if both ??m??ni?? d??id? ?n th? same ??ur?? ?f ??ti?n. The ????ff m?trix i? shown b?l?w (figur?? r??r???nt ?r?fit in milli?n? ?f d?ll?r?).Thus, if b?th ??m??ni?? d??id? t? introduce th? n?w technology, th?? w?uld earn $600 milli?n apiece, while intr?du?ing a r?vi??d v?r?i?n ?f the ?ld?r technology w?uld earn them $300 milli?n ???h, as shown in th? ??ll?.But if C?m??n? A decides alone t? intr?du?? th? n?w t??hn?l?g?, it would ?nl? ??rn $150 million, ?v?n th?ugh C?m??n? B w?uld ??rn $0 (?r??um?bl? b???u?? ??n?um?r? m?? n?t b? willing to pay f?r its now-obsolete t??hn?l?g?).In thi? case, it m?k?? ??n?? for both companies t? work together rather th?n on their ?wn.Coordination Payoff MatrixCompany BNew technologyOld technologyCompany ANew technology(?) 600, 600(b) 0, 150Old technology(?) 150, 0(d) 300, 300C?nti??d? G?m?Thi? i? an ?xt?n?iv?-f?rm game in whi?h two players ?lt?rn?t?l? get a chance t? t?k? th? l?rg?r share ?f a slowly in?r???ing m?n?? ?t??h.Th? ??nti??d? g ?m? i? ???u?nti?l, since the ?l???r? make th?ir m?v?? one ?ft?r ?n?th?r rather th?n ?imult?n??u?l?; each ?l???r also knows th? ?tr?t?gi?? ?h???n b? th? ?l???r? who played b?f?r? them. The game concludes as ???n as a ?l???r takes th? ?t??h, with th?t player g?tting the l?rg?r ??rti?n ?nd th? ?th?r player g?tting th? ?m?ll?r ??rti?n.A? ?n ?x?m?l?, assume Pl???r A g??? fir?t and h?? t? d??id? if h? should “t?k?” ?r “pass” th? ?t??h, whi?h ?urr?ntl? amounts to $2. If h? t?k??, th?n A ?nd B g?t $1 ???h, but if A passes, th? d??i?i?n to take or pass now has to be m?d? b? Pl???r B. If B t?k??, ?h? gets $3 (i.e. th? ?r?vi?u? stash ?f $2 + $1) and A g?t? $0.But if B passes, A n?w g?t? to d??id? wh?th?r t? t?k? or pass, and so ?n. If both players ?lw??? ?h???? t? ????, th?? ???h r???iv? a ????ff ?f $100 ?t the ?nd ?f th? g?m?.Th? point ?f th? g?m? i? if A ?nd B b?th ?????r?t? ?nd ??ntinu? to pass until the ?nd ?f th? g?m?, th?? get the m?ximum ????ut ?f $100 ???h. But if th?? distrust th? ?th?r ?l???r ?nd ?x???t th?m to “t?k?” ?t the fir?t ????rtunit?, Nash ??uilibrium ?r?di?t? th? players will take th? lowest ????ibl? claim ($1 in thi? ????).Ex??rim?nt?l ?tudi?? h?v? ?h?wn, however, this “r?ti?n?l” b?h?vi?ur (as ?r?di?t?d b? g?m? theory) i? ??ld?m ?xhibit?d in r??l lif?. Thi? i? n?t intuitiv?l? ?ur?ri?ing given th? tin? size of th? initial ????ut in r?l?ti?n t? th? fin?l ?n?. Simil?r b?h?vi?r b? ?x??rim?nt?l ?ubj??t? has ?l?? b??n ?xhibit?d in th? tr?v?ll?r’? dil?mm?.Traveler’s Dil?mm?Thi? n?n-z?r? ?um g?m?, in whi?h both ?l???r? ?tt?m?t t? m?ximiz? their ?wn ????ut with?ut regard to the ?th?r, w?? devised by ???n?mi?t K?u?hikB??u in 1994.F?r example, in tr?v?l?r’? dil?mm?, ?n ?irlin? agrees t? ??? tw? travellers ??m??n??ti?n for damages t? id?nti??l it?m?.However, the two travellers are ????r?t?l? required t? estimate th? value ?f the item, with a minimum ?f $2 ?nd a m?ximum ?f $100. If both writ? d?wn th? ??m? v?lu?, th? ?irlin? will r?imbur?? ? ??h of th?m that ?m?unt. But if the v?lu?? diff?r, th? ?irlin? will ??? them th? l?w?r value, with a b?nu? ?f $2 f?r th? tr?v?ll?r who wr?t? d?wn this l?w?r value ?nd a ??n?lt? of $2 f?r th? tr?v?ll?r who wrote d?wn th? higher v?lu?.Th? N??h equilibrium l?v?l, b???d ?n b??kw?rd indu?ti?n, is $2 in this ???n?ri?. But ?? in th? ??nti??d? g?m?, laboratory experiments consistently d?m?n?tr?t? m??t ??rti?i??nt?, n?iv?l? or ?th?rwi??, ?i?k a numb?r much high?r th?n $2.Tr?v?l?r’? dilemma can b? ???li?d to ?n?l?z? a v?ri?t? of r??l-lif? situations. Th? ?r????? ?f backward induction, for ?x?m?l?, ??n h?l? explain h?w tw? ??m??ni?? ?ng?g?d in ?utthr??t competition ??n steadily r?t?h?t product ?ri??? l?w?r in a bid t? gain m?rk?t ?h?r?, whi?h m?? r??ult in th?m in?urring in?r???ingl? gr??t?r l????? in th? process.Wh?t i? a Zero-Sum G?m?Z?r?-?um is a ?itu?ti?n in game th??r? in whi?h ?n? ??r??n’? gain i? ??uiv?l?nt t? ?n?th?r’? l???, ?? the n?t ?h?ng? in w??lth or b?n?fit is zero. A z?r?- ?um g?m? m?? h?v? as few ?? two ?l???r?, ?r milli?n? of ??rti?i??nt?.Z?r?-?um games ?r? f?und in g?m? th??r?, but ?r? l??? common th?n n?n-z?r? ?um g?m??. Poker ?nd gambling ?r? ???ul?r examples ?f z?r?-?um g?m?? ?in?? th? sum ?f th? amounts w?n b? ??m? ?l???r? equals th? ??mbin?d l????? ?f th? ?th?r?.Games lik? chess ?nd t?nni?, where th?r? is ?n? winner ?nd ?n? l???r, ?r? also zero-sum g?m??. In the fin?n?i?l markets, ??ti?n? and futur?? ?r? ?x?m?l?? of z?r?-?um games, ?x?luding tr?n???ti?n ???t?. F?r every ??r??n wh? g?in? on a ??ntr??t, there is a ??unt?r-??rt? wh? l????.BREAKING DOWN Z?r?-Sum GameIn g?m? th??r?, the g?m? ?f matching ??nni?? i? often ?it?d ?? an ?x?m?l? of a zero-sum g?m?. Th? game inv?lv?? tw? ?l???r?, A and B, ?imult?n??u?l? ?l??ing a ??nn? ?n the t?bl?.Th? payoff depends ?n wh?th?r th? pennies match ?r not. If b?th ??nni?? ?r? h??d? ?r t?il?, Player A wins ?nd k???? Pl???r B’s penny; if th?? d? not match, Player B win? and k???? Pl???r A’? ??nn?.This is a z?r?-?um game because one player’s gain is th? ?th?r’? loss. Th? ????ff? for Pl???r? A ?nd B are ?h?wn in th? t?bl? b?l?w, with the fir?t num?r?l in ??ll? (a) thr?ugh (d) representing Player A’? payoff, ?nd th? ????nd num?r?l Pl???r B’s ?l???ff. A? ??n b? ???n, th? ??mbin?d ?l???ff for A and B in ?ll f?ur ??ll? i? z?r?.Most ?th?r popular game th??r? strategies lik? the ?ri??n?r’? dil?mm?, Cournot C?m??titi?n, Centipede G?m? and Deadlock are n?n-z?r? ?um.Zero-sum games are the opposite of win-win situations â€" ?u?h ?? a trade ?gr??m?nt that ?ignifi??ntl? increases trade b?tw??n tw? n?ti?n? â€" or lose-lose situations, like war f?r instance. In r??l lif?, however, thing? ?r? not ?lw??? ?? ?l??r-?ut, ?nd g?in? ?nd l????? ?r? ?ft?n diffi?ult to ?u?ntif?.In th? ?t??k m?rk?t, tr?ding is ?ft?n thought ?f a z?r?-?um game. H?w?v?r, b???u?? tr?d?? ?r? m?d? ?n the b??i? ?f futur? ?x???t?ti?n? ?nd tr?d?r? have diff?r?nt ?r?f?r?n??? f?r risk, a trade can be mutu?ll? b?n?fi?i?l. Inv?? ting l?ng?r t?rm is a ???itiv? ?um ?itu?ti?n b???u?? ???it?l fl?w? f??ilit?ti?n ?r?du?ti?n ?nd j?b? th?t th?n provide ?r?du?ti?n ?nd j?b? that th?n provide ??ving? and in??m? th?t th?n provide investment to ??ntinu? the cycle.Pri?ing G?m?This example ??int? a v?r? grim ?i?tur? of human int?r??ti?n?. Indeed, m?n? times we observe ?????r?ti?n r?th?r than it? ??m?l?t? failure. One important ?r?? ?f r????r?h in game theory is th? analysis of ?nvir?nm?nt?, in?tituti?n?, ?nd n?rm?, which ??tu?ll? ?u?t?in cooperation in th? face ?f such ???mingl? h???l??? ?itu?ti?n? ?? th? ?ri??n?r?’ dilemma.Just t? illu?tr?t? ?n? ?u?h ???n?ri?, ??n?id?r a r???titi?n ?f the Prisoners’ Dil?mm? g?m?. In a r????t?d int?r??ti?n, each ?l???r h?? t? take int? ????unt n?t ?nl? wh?t i? their ????ff in ???h interaction but ?l?? h?w th? ?ut??m? ?f ???h ?f these int?r??ti?n? influences the futur? ones.F?r ?x?m?l?, ???h ?l???r m?? induce ?????r?ti?n b? th? ?th?r player b? ?d??ting a ?tr?t?g? th?t ?uni?h?? b?d b?h? vi?r ?nd rewards good b?h?vi?r.LIMIT?TI?NS ?F THE GAME THEORYInfinit? number of ?tr?t?g?In a g?m? th??r? we ???um? that th?r? is finit? numb?r ?f ????ibl? ??ur??? of action available to ???h player. But in practice a ?l???r may have infinit? numb?r ?f strategies or ??ur??? of ??ti?n.Kn?wl?dg? ?b?ut ?tr?t?g?Game theory ???um?? that each player ?? the knowledge ?f ?tr?t?gi?? ?v?il?bl? to his ????n?nt. But ??m? tim?? knowledge ?b?ut strategy about th? opponent is n?t ?v?il?bl? to ?l???r?. Thi? l??d? t? th? wr?ng conclusions.Z?r? ?ut??m??W? have ???um?d that g?in of one person i? th? l??? of another person. But in practice g?in ?f ?n? ??r??n m?? n?t b? ??u?l t? th? l??? ?f another person i.?. opponent.Ri?k ?nd un??rt?int?G?m? th??r? does not t?k?? into consideration th? concept of ?r?b?bilit?. So game th??r? u?u?ll? ignores th? ?r???n?? ?f ri?k ?nd un??rt?int?.Finit? numb?r of ??m??tit?r?Th?r? ?r? finit? numb?r? ?f ??m??tit?r? ?? h?? b??n ???um?d in th? g?m? theory. But in real ?r??ti?? th?r? ??n b? more th?n th? ?x???t?d number of ?l???r?.C?rt?int? of P?? offG?m? th??r? ???um?? th?t ????ff is always kn?wn in advance. But ??m?tim?? it i? impossible to kn?w th? pay ?ff in ?dv?n??. The d??i?i?n ?itu?ti?n in f??t becomes multidimensional with large numb?r ?f v?ri?bl??.Rul?? ?f G?m?Ev?r? g?m? i? ?l???d ????rding t? the ??t ?f rul?? i.?. specific rul?? whi?h g?v?rn the b?h?vi?ur of th? players. As th?r? we h?v? set of rules ?f playing Ch???, B?dmint?n, Hockey ?t?. G?m? th??r? ???um?? ?v?r? player kn?w? th??? rules.

Homology Is A Central Concept Within The Field Of...

Homology is a central concept within the field of phylogenetics. It represents the idea of similarity in structure or anatomical position between organisms, indicating a common origin. Homology is traditionally contrasted with analogy; the similarity of function in two structures that have contrasting origins. However, it is now more common for the concept to be contrasted against homoplasy; a character shared by a set of species that their common ancestor does not possess. The concept of homology was introduced in the early 19th century, before the Darwinian evolutionary theory was formulated. Two main criteria were used until the first half of the 20th century, in order to establish homologies between species. 1. The positional criterion. This outlines that the relative configuration and position of homologous structures must be maintained between the different species that possess them. 2. The embryological criterion. This is the assumption that the identical developmental precursors are used to develop homologous structures in individuals of different species. Development in the phylogenetics field in the second half of the 20th century included the introduction of molecular phylogeny and evolution. These additions strongly enhanced the concept of homology. In addition, it was found that homologous structures can develop from non-homologous development precursors. This caused the embryological criterion to fail, and so new outlines needed to be established in order

Avatar Essay - 1585 Words

Myths are supernatural or religious tales with cultural and historical backgrounds, often containing moral lessons that are valued by the culture they originated from. The movie Avatar is a modern myth, its popularity stemming from the inspiration it draws from familiar and widespread themes found in classical myths. Avatar reuses and refreshes these themes for current audiences. Ancient stories such as those of Icarus, Prometheus, Gilgamesh, and Hercules, as well as contemporary issues, represent many of the same themes that are revealed in Avatar. Avatar is the story of Jake Sully, a paraplegic marine that is sent to the world Pandora to take the place of his dead-brothers job as a Na’vi avatar pilot. The humans on Pandora use these†¦show more content†¦In the ancient Greek story of Icarus, Daedalus constructs a pair of wings made out of wax and feathers for himself and his son Icarus to escape the Labyrinth in Crete. In their attempt to overcome their human limitations, Icarus fails to obey his fathers only rule: do not fly too close to the sun. He reaches too far and the wax on his wings melts, causing him to plummet to his death. This is often thought to illustrate the consequences humans must face when overreaching and trying too hard to do what they are not meant to do. Icarus’s failure to listen to common sense is synonymous with the failure of the humans to listen to Jake Sully in Avatar. The humans cause the â€Å"death† of any relationship with the Na’vi due to their own negligence . Another myth of a cautionary tale concerns Prometheus, a Titan, who chose to go against the gods by stealing the secret of fire in order to help humans build society and live as gods. Yet in the end, the humans suffer as Pandora is sent to earth with a box filled with terrible things with which to punish the mortals who dared to take one of the things that separated gods from humans: fire. The world of Pandora in Avatar is like the Pandora of myth. The humans had to figuratively and literally dig deep into the world of Pandora to uncover the good and bad, just as Pandora had to open a box to unleash hope and evil. Jake himself metaphorically opens Pandora’s Box by accepting the offer to be theShow MoreRelatedAnalysis Of Avatar s Avatar 1112 Words   |  5 PagesAvatar was one of the best movies I have seen in my life thus far. When I first watched this movie, I was struck by many conflicting emotions. There were so many ethical and intercultural topics in the film that it ma de me think on morality of the character within the film. I will give a summary of the movie, and analyze the factions within the film that showed many concepts of intercultural communication. Avatar begins with the main character, Jake Sully, arriving on the moon of Pandora. PandoraRead MoreAvatar, By James Cameron Essay1358 Words   |  6 PagesDecember 10, 2016 Avatar Avatar, a 2009 American epic science fiction film was directed, written, co-produced, and co-edited by James Cameron. The film’s main stars are Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana, Stephen Lang, Giovanni Ribisi, Michelle Rodriquez, and Sigourney Weaver. The story formula or plot is the specific actions and events that filmmakers select, and the order in which they arrange those events and actions to effectively convey on-screen the movie’s narrative to a viewer. Avatar takes place inRead MoreAvatar, By James Cameron1765 Words   |  8 PagesAvatar is one of those profound movies with a deep meaning that strikes different emotions of the audience, which they might have not known they had. It hit most of the questionable topics that are mostly unspeakable now. Avatar is a spectacular movie written and directed by James Cameron. The movie is set in a breathtaking alien world called Pandora, which is inhabited by the Na’vi race. At first, they are viewed as a primitive wild, race but in reality they are more highly evolved than the audienceRead MoreAvatar, An Former Paraplegic Marine1029 Words   |  5 PagesIn the 2009 James Cameron film Avatar, an ex-paraplegic Marine, Jake Sully became indirectly involved with an expe dition to natural resource rich Pandora, an extraterrestrial planet needed by Earthens to continue existing thanks to inevitable raw material exhaustion. For Jake, his call to adventure began when his life course was altered due to the â€Å"random† death of his scientist brother. Little did Jake know, with his cynical attitude, that his life was about to change for eternity. InitiallyRead MoreDances With Wolves And Avatar1142 Words   |  5 Pagesâ€Å"Dances with Wolves and Avatar: Similar but Different† Dances with Wolves and Avatar are thought to be very different, but they are actually more similar than viewers may realize. First off, these are two must see films! The viewer walks away with much more than just having seen a movie. Both of these movies encourage cultural understanding, motivate, and teach individuality. Dances with Wolves and Avatar are alike in plot and cultural significance. These two films are alike in plot because in bothRead MoreAvatar Movie Analysis760 Words   |  4 Pages Avatar In 2009 Avatar was released with a highly positive review. Watching this movie around eight times in the first year it was out I concluded that the deeper meaning of the story could be taken two different ways. In a sense it could be depicting how the European’s came and took the Indian’s land, just how the Na’vi seemed to be Native American in traditions and beliefs. The second way of viewing it could be how the humans are killing the planet and its native population just so theyRead MoreJames Cameron: Avatar Essay665 Words   |  3 PagesAvatar James Cameron, the director of Titanic, is innovative and intelligent. Cameron is a man that knows exactly what variables are necessary in creating a movie. About 12 years after the release of Titanic, Cameron creates yet another smashing, breath-taking, mind-boggling film. One that initially raised suspicion but later proved to be an extraordinary film. The name of that film is Avatar. Avatar is a sensational piece of work. It has a clean cut message about earth preservation and anti-warRead MoreAvatar V.S Pocahontas Essay681 Words   |  3 Pagessooner or later, though, you always have to wake up,† (Cameron, 2009). When comparing James Cameron’s Avatar with Walt Disney’s Pocahontas, you may find several similarities in the movies; but don’t be fooled, because it is the differences of these two movies that sets them so widely apart, rather than the similarities that supposedly bring them together. Many people seem to have the opinion that Avatar is just a futuristic, visually stunning version of Walt Disney’s Pocahontas but in reality, they areRead MoreAvatar: Race, Gender, and Stereotypes1417 Words   |  6 PagesAvatar: Race, Gender, and Stereotypes Avatar uses a variety of film genres and styles. One of the styles is the Cowboys versus Indians theme. It is clear that Avatar is a product of post-colonialism: it shows the Navi as the relatively harmless yet environmentally respectful and spiritually in tuned indigenous population, while the humans are a corporate military whose only goal is mine the resources of Pandora. The film presents an anti-military narrative. The soldiers are portrayed as cruelRead MoreAvatar Is A Science Fiction Film Essay2020 Words   |  9 PagesAvatar is a science fiction film that is written and directed by James Cameron. It is an excellent example of popular cinema because it is â€Å"well liked by many†. Avatar was released in 2009 and is the highest grossing film worldwide in cinematic history. It has received 80 awards, including a Golden Globe for Best Motion Picture of the Year, has been nominated for 9 Academy Awards and has received two Oscars. In this essay, I will first discuss the plot of the film outlining the source of conflict

Leadership The MBTI Assessment Free Essays

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is a personality assessment that helps to assess one’s psychological preferences based on a psychometric questionnaire. These preferences were extracted from the typological theories proposed by Carl Gustav Jung writings in his book ‘Psychological Types’. The MBTI focuses on normal populations and emphasizes the value of naturally occurring differences. We will write a custom essay sample on Leadership: The MBTI Assessment or any similar topic only for you Order Now [1] Also recognized commonly as a behavioral assessment tool, the MBTI uses a combination of 4 letters and each represent a clearly defined attribute. Altogether, the MBTI test consists of 16 different personality types that will describe one’s personality in alleged detail. The MBTI test has reviewed that I am type ENTJ which covers aspects of being extraverted, intuitive, thinking and judging altogether but in different extents. According to Dr. David Keirsey, he states that a person with type ENTJ is recognized as a ‘Fieldmarshal’ or basically someone who is a natural born leader as agreed by Joe Butt in his article on ENTJ. He adds that this attribute of Fieldmarshals are a rare breed that are natural at taking the lead, are structural organizers and have an act on devising contingency plans. These collectively form characteristics of a leader who will be decisive and are visionary in setting goals and direction. Having these traits of a leader, Fieldmarshals are expected to take up roles of higher responsibility and will usually take pleasure in them. However their strong devotion to their work may sometimes be a hindrance to their social lifestyles. Another prevalent characteristic of a Fieldmarshal is the tendency to emphasize on efficiency and are usually intolerant of prodigality. [5 6] I have to admit that while reading the results and review of my personality type; it felt like a strong confirmation of how I evaluate myself. Most of the traits specified were indeed very accurate such that I am a natural leader. I have come to realize that not only do I have the tendency to lead others but I also enjoy taking responsibility and I feel more comfortable in planning ahead rather than doing things spontaneously. Being extraverted is also a spot on because I am that person who would walk across the room to get to know someone new and am not afraid to express my thoughts publicly. Looking at the basis of how the personality results were generated, I still do not comprehend how I only scored 1 in the ‘Thinking’ category as I usually make decisions based on facts and logic. Apart from the MBTI test, the Dominance Influence Steadiness Conscientiousness (DISC) test is also another credible assessment tool that provides an effective feedback and rational to help one identify his/her personal behavior and strengths, thus increasing self-awareness. The DISC assessment is a shorter test as compared to the MBTI and yet yields more specific results from over 19,000 personalized responses and 384 separate behavioral descriptions. [34] One other assessment would be the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument (HBDI) which measures thinking preferences in people. This model functions very similar to the others by incorporating cognitive style measurement. HBDI in short, adapts a concept of determining one’s dominant thinking style based on analytical, sequential, interpersonal and imaginative aspects. [74] Paul D. Tieger and Barbara Barron-Tieger, who are both recognized experts in personality type and career development, agreed that the MBTI can serve as career counselors to guide and find jobs that are best suited for a person. [8] However the Army Research Institute commissioned a review on this and argued that there is no evidence for the utility of the test and further claimed that the classification scheme is limited and may be an example of stereotyping personalities. Other questions have been raised in David Pittenger’s report of how the MBTI instrument comes up short for what it purports to measure. Some of which are mainly concerns on the reliability and validity of the results. [9] Considering all that, the objective of the MBTI is somewhat achieved when it helps to facilitate self-awareness which can then lead to self- improvement. With critical feedback provided, one will be able to realize their potential essentially natural leaders, and also to reaffirm one’s focus on their strengths. As discussed, discretion may be necessary to protect one against undue reliance upon the MBTI especially in career choices. How to cite Leadership: The MBTI Assessment, Papers

Rare Earth Element free essay sample

Lanthanum is a crucial rare earth element to our modern economy because it plays an integral component in modern technologies such as: laptop computers, electric automobiles, and hand-held electronic devices such as cellular phones. Lanthanum basically acts as a battery source to the above devices modern technologies. Lanthanum is also make glass and lastly to reduce the level of phosphates in patients with kidney disease. Geologists obtain Lanthanum through the process of solvent extraction of light rare earth minerals such as bastnaesite, monazite, allanite and cerite. Lanthanum is also found in felsic igneous rocks and to a lesser extent, lower ultramafic rocks. Lanthanum has a complex multistage extraction process in which the extraction of monazite is involved. There are three main steps which are implemented in the extraction process. First step is the extraction of lanthanum hydroxide from monazite by using caustic soda, second step is the digestion with nitric acid and precipitation with ammonium hydroxide and the final step is calcination of Lanthanum oxalate to Lanthanum oxide. We will write a custom essay sample on Rare Earth Element or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page The leading producer of REEs in the world is China; they account for more than 48 percent of the world’s REE reserves. More than 70% of light rare earth elements (which includes Lanthanum) are supplied from one mine in China; Bayan Obo mine. China’s stronghold over the REE industry compels us to have good relations with them. Other producers are Brazil, Malaysia and India. There may be other places in the world that may have Lanthanum but they do not use it in a particularly capital intensive way. For instance high values of Lanthanum (gt;36 mg kg-1) is found in the sub soils of northern Portugal and Galicia in Spain, in the Italian alkaline magmatic province and in karst of Slovenia and Croatia. Through reasonable diplomatic deliberation the U. S can coerce these countries to allow them to turn their values into a capital intensive industry. Lanthanum plays a crucial role in our economy, however if we cannot find enough of it, we could use cerium as a backup REE. Cerium can also be used as a battery supply and can be used to produce glass similarly to Lanthanum. Aluminum can be used as a supplementary medicinal element instead of Lanthanum. Aluminum is a common element and it is accessible so the U. S has nothing to worry about as it regards to patients with Kidney problem In order to obtain cerium, the U. S does not need to import cerium from China or any of the other countries that have considerable.