Game Theory on Iran-US
For almost three decades since the Iranian Revolution of 1979, there has consistently been a conflict between Iran and the United States over a host of issues. The relations between the two countries became more challenging since 2003 after it came to light that Iran had been developing its nuclear program. Since then some US officials have even gone so far as to announce - and repeat - the possibility of a military strike against Iranian facilities to end the nuclear program.In reality, up to now no such drastic action has taken place. Rather instead, in a milder reaction, the US, aided by its European allies and enjoying Russian and Chinese lukewarm acquiescence, has imposed several rounds of sanctions against Iran through the adoption of obligatory resolutions by the United Nations Security Council. But, these actions have failed to force the Iranians to end their program. As a result, many experts argue that a new policy should be pursued toward Iran vis-à-vis its nuclear dossier. So the main challenge which poses itself is to predict when and how this conflict will come to an end.In this paper, different game theory models are used to interpret the current situation of the crisis. It is shown that while at each step it may be more favorable for each party to insist on its claims, the overall result of this approach may not be so favorable for all. As a result, both parties should think about the long term effects of their decisions. It is also shown that the absence of mutual trust could be the main factor that has forced both sides to reach the current point of crisis.
Therefore, any attempt towards re-establishing mutual trust between the two governments might be a major step leading to a lasting solution. Furthermore, different possible choices for the US government and the long term effects of each choice will be analyzed. The analysis will also address economic aspects of the conflict, and the long-term effects of any decision and the best possible choices for both governments will be presented.
Famous Mathematicians
Many of the techniques and equations which are used in numerical methods are linked with famous mathematicians and scientists. Many of the mathematicians who worked on their problems struggled for a long time to reach a solution – sometimes it took a few days and sometimes it took years to hit on the solution. But, these famous people were all patient people, which is the reason they could achieve success. And, patience is one of the hallmarks of success. A number of mathematicians have contributed to the evergreen subject and of Mathematics and made into the subject that it is today. Profiles of a few mathematicians are seen here.
Archimedes: He is acclaimed as the greatest mathematician who has made significant contributions in geometry. His works had original ideas and excellent computational techniques which has made him a great mathematician.
Euclid: Euclid is a famous mathematician who has authored a treatise called ‘Euclid’s Elements’, which is divided into 13 parts. The treatise deals with geometry and number theory. His other works deal with optics, phenomena, division of figures and data.
Sir Isaac Newton: Sri Isaac Newton was a great scientist and mathematician who created the basis for calculus. By using differentiation as a basis, he developed simple analytical methods for various calculations. He created the world famous theory about the three laws of motion. He published the book ‘Principia’, which is considered to be the greatest scientific book ever to be written.
Pythagoras: Pythagoras was a Greek mathematician, who strongly believed that all relations could be expressed as a number relation. He was responsible for the Pythagorean Theorem. He discovered proof for the existence of irrational numbers. He was the person who gave birth to modern day geometry.
Blaise Pascal: He was a French mathematician, who made inroads into geometry and other branches of mathematics. His work led to the invention of the syringe and the hydraulic press.
Aryabhatta: He was an eminent Indian mathematician, who was responsible for finding out the approximate value of Pi. He has also shown us how to calculate the value of a triangle.
Ramanujam: He has been described as the greatest mathematical genius of the 20th century. Ramanujam prime and Ramanujam theta functions have lead to further research. His formulae were found useful in string theory and in crystallography.
Holt mathematics
How would you describe the philosophy behind the books?
Patti Smith: The idea was to offer something with a balanced approach. For every lesson, there's opportunities for teacher-centered instruction as well as student-centered instruction. Because one of the things we know from all of the research we do is that students have different skill sets, they have different learning styles. Teachers have different skill sets and different teaching styles. And so one of our goals is to provide options so that teachers can teach to the best of their ability and to the best of the students' ability. We also have options that allow for students to collaborate and do investigations. The material is accessible for low-level students, and challenging for high-level students.
So there are a lot of different options for how a teacher might use these books in a class?
Smith: That's exactly right. And one of the things we know is that a lot of options can be overwhelming. So one of the things we've done in our teachers' materials is provide clear navigation for your different types of student groups.
Many parents want a traditional-looking math book with very specific examples of how to do math problems. Do your books do this?
Smith: That is one of the elements of instruction we have in our program, and it is consistent throughout the book, because we know a lot of teachers and a lot of students and parents do prefer direct instruction. For every lesson there are multiple examples, with solutions mapped out in the book for students to follow. And then, one of the things that parents have really liked about the program is our lesson tutorial videos. We have one for every example in the lessons, using a master teacher, Dr. Edward Burger, who recently won the Cherry Award for Great Teaching at Baylor University, and he's a former stand-up comic.
In the inquiry-based versus traditional spectrum of math textbooks, where would your books land?
Robin Blakely: I would have to say it falls just to the right of the center — with the right leaning more toward the direct instruction. But pretty close to the center, because of providing the option to bring in investigations as you deem appropriate for your student.
And Holt thinks this is the best approach because it gives teachers lots of options?
Blakely: We feel that it's very important to provide lots of options, because not every student learns the same way. Some need more instruction and more direction, and others don't.
Some teachers say they like inquiry-based books because it's easy to find supplemental math drills, but it's hard to find well-written inquiry-based problems.
Smith: While it may be easy to go and get work sheets, you need to know that they work. So all the pieces tie together, link together to create really strong curriculum and content.
advertising
So the math drills are specific to the topic you're trying to teach.
Blakely: Exactly. We all know the Internet has made a ton of material available to teachers, but we have an outstanding group of authors who have helped us develop this program. You don't know who wrote this other geometry instruction or exercise you might find online.
In Seattle, the fight over textbooks ended up in court. Is that happening elsewhere in the country?
Blakely: I haven't seen any other lawsuits like this ... It's really not surprising to hear this happening at all. Everybody is really taking math, in particular, very seriously right now. There's always been a controversy about the best way to teach math.
(From the Seattle Times)
The Discovering Mathematics series (part 2)
Coe: We just received recently a letter from a teacher up in your area. Her math experience with her students up to that point is, "Your homework is to do 1 thru 50 odd." And when she started using Discovering, the homework was: "Do 1 through 10 odd." And the kids thought they had scored. And actually, they came back the next day and said, "You tricked us, you made us think." And I think that's what's possibly going on in some of those reactions you're hearing.
The Discovering books have been criticized by parents, but they've been the top pick of a couple of districts in our area, including Seattle and Issaquah. Any thoughts on why the textbooks seem to be more popular with educators than with parents?
advertising
Coe: I think because (parents) lack familiarity — this doesn't look like what I was taught. I don't know how you get students to a place where more is required of them by repeating things that have been done in the past. That's not how we move forward in life.
What can you tell parents who are struggling with this book, and can't find examples of how to do the math?
Coe: We appreciate that parents won't find what's in front of them familiar. We have a Web site dedicated to parents, students and mentors: www.keymath.com.
Two math experts who reviewed textbooks for Washington state wrote a report that called Discovering "mathematically unsound."
Coe: Our books are mathematically accurate. We don't publish books with errors in them.
Ryan: There were also the two Washington mathematicians, Jim King and George Bright, who found the materials were mathematically sound as well. The materials were also the top-ranked by OSPI (Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction) in their study as the best match.
The Discovering series was on OSPI's initial list of recommended textbooks, but last year the state whittled the list down to just one series, Holt Mathematics. Do you think your books should have remained on the list?
Coe: Well, a book (the Algebra I and II books) that gets ranked highest among 12 publishers, and the series as a whole ties statistically in first place with Holt, that was looked at by a team of over 50 experts — yeah. (Laughs.) We think that.
Is this tug of war over math textbooks being played out elsewhere in the country?
Coe: There is a very healthy debate, as there should be, around this selection of textbooks. A district makes a big commitment when they buy into a program. Quite right — whatever is getting looked at ought to be scrutinized very carefully. What's unusual is that having gone through that process, and the (Seattle) school board having made the decision based on the evidence in front of them, that a lawsuit was then filed. This is very unusual.
The Discovering Mathematics series (part 1)
How would you describe the philosophy behind the books?
Jim Ryan: Rather than going from a traditional book where a teacher explains the abstract and then the students practice that abstract concept, and then eventually they get to an application — which are generally called the word problems — we've turned that around for each lesson. The lessons are approached so we can try and answer that question "When will I ever use that?" before it ever gets asked. And so students see the meaningfulness of the math as the lesson is being presented to them.
Karen Coe: When we meet teachers, the way they characterize our books is we teach for understanding, or we explain the "why" behind the "what."
Can you give us an example?
Ryan: When students learn linear equations, we start off with the students gathering data, or figuring out data, so the first thing is they will put data into a numerical table, and then they'll graph that data in an x-y graph and fit a line to that data. Then they solve for the equation for that line. In the traditional materials, we present every student with the equation y = mx + b and then you give it meaning after they've seen that. So, you ask them to memorize that and then you try and give it meaning afterward.
Sounds like you're trying to lead students to an "aha" moment rather than having them memorize formulas.
Coe: That is a perfect way of describing it.
One of the criticisms of Discovering is that its investigations take too long, and that can turn off students who are good at math.
Coe: It's not our experience. And every time we work with schools on implementation plans, we work on pacing guides (materials that help teachers plan lessons), and it's simply not possible in a book for every investigation to be done in a year.
Another criticism, from students and parents, is that what's missing from Discovering is direct instruction, or very specific examples of how to do a math problem.
(read the whole article here)
Game Theory – Robert John Aumann
Robert John Aumann is an Israeli/American mathematician and a member of the United States National Academy of Sciences. He is a professor at the Center for the Study of Rationality in the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in Israel. He also holds a visiting position at Stony Brook University and is one of the founding members of the Center for Game Theory in Economics at Stony Brook.
Aumann received the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics in 2005 for his work on conflict and cooperation through game-theory analysis. He shared the prize with Thomas Schelling.
Aumann's greatest contribution was in the realm of repeated games, which are situations in which players encounter the same situation over and over again.
Aumann was the first to define the concept of correlated equilibrium in game theory, which is a type of equilibrium in non-cooperative games that is more flexible than the classical Nash equilibrium. Furthermore, Aumann has introduced the first purely formal account of the notion of common knowledge in game theory. He collaborated with Lloyd Shapley on the Aumann-Shapley value. He is also known for his agreement theorem, in which he argues that under his given conditions, two Bayesian rationalists with common prior beliefs cannot agree to disagree.[1]
Aumann and Maschler used Game Theory also to analyze Talmudic dilemmas.[2] They were able to solve the mystery about the "division problem", a long-time dilemma of explaining the Talmudic rationale in dividing the heritage of a late husband to his three wives, depending on the worth of the heritage compared to its original worth.[3] The article in that matter was dedicated to a son of Aumann, Shlomo, who was killed during the 1982 Lebanon War while serving as a tank gunner in the Israel Defense Forces's armored corps.
These are some of the themes of Aumann's Nobel lecture, named "War and Peace":[4]
1. War is not irrational, but must be scientifically studied in order to be understood, and eventually conquered;
2. Repeated game study de-emphasizes the "now" for the sake of the "later";
3. Simplistic peacemaking can cause war, while arms race, credible war threats and mutually assured destruction can reliably prevent war.
Repeated game – Game Theory
Game Theory is one mathematical theory that is applied on a multitude of (different) areas, and can be accessed not only via the studies of math, but also from life sciences (like psychology, which encourages students to understand game theory in order to understand some key human behavior patterns). In this short post I will look into the introduction of this theory, in hope to follow up on it in the next post with the actual people involved in research and development of this rich theory.
In game theory, a repeated game (supergame or iterated game) is an extensive form game which consists in some number of repetitions of some base game (called a stage game). The stage game is usually one of the well-studied 2-person games. It captures the idea that a player will have to take into account the impact of his current action on the future actions of other players; this is sometimes called his reputation. The presence of different equilibrium properties is because the threat of retaliation is real, since one will play the game again with the same person. It can be proved that every strategy that has a payoff greater than the minmax payoff can be a Nash Equilibrium, which is very large set of strategies. Single stage game or single shot game are names for non-repeated games.
The most widely studied repeated games are games that are repeated a possibly infinite number of times. On many occasions, it is found that the optimal method of playing a repeated game is not to repeatedly play a Nash strategy of the constituent game (look at the Repeated prisoner's dilemma example), but to cooperate and play a socially optimum strategy. This can be interpreted as a "social norm" and one essential part of infinitely repeated games is punishing players who deviate from this cooperative strategy. The punishment may be something like playing a strategy which leads to reduced payoff to both players for the rest of the game (called a trigger strategy). There are many results in theorems which deal with how to achieve and maintain a socially optimal equilibrium in repeated games. These results are collectively called "Folk Theorems". An important feature of a repeated game is the way in which a player's preferences may be modeled. There are many different ways in which a preference relation may be modeled in an infinitely repeated game, the main ones are :
- Discounting - valuation of the game diminishes with time depending on the discount parameter δ
- Limit of means - can be thought of as an average over T periods as T approaches infinity.
- Overtaking - Sequence
is superior to sequence 
if 
The Saturday (Simple) Question
Question : What is meant by 'Casting out nines' ?
Answer : Casting out the nine is a method of checking answers to multiplication, addition and subtraction.
Casting out nines was known to the Roman bishop Hippolytos as early as the third century. It was employed by Twelfth-century Hindu mathematicians.
It is based on the idea of finding the sum of the digits in a number and then adding the digits in the resulting sum, etc., until a one digit number results. This addition of the digits in a number is further simplified by first discarding or casting away any digits whose sum is 9. The remainder is set down, in each case as the check number.
For example,
8216 x 4215 = 34630440, this is how you proceed.
4 + 2 + 1 + 5 = 12, casting out the nines leaves 3 as check number.
8 + 2 + 1 + 6 = 17, casting out the nines leaves 8 as check number.
3 + 4 + 6 + 3 + 0 + 4 + 4 + 0 = 24, casting the nines leaves 6 as check number.
3 x 8 = 24, 2 + 4 = 6 which was the check number of the original product. So the multiplication is correct.
Casting out nines is not in wide use today, mainly because of the widespread use of calculators and computers.
Casting out Nines
There are many little tricks in mathematics can make solving problems much easier. Casting out the 9s is one of the tricks can help make sure your answer is right much easier. Many people check the digit sum of the answers to make sure that their answers are correct. Casting out the 9s can make checking the answers and getting digit sums much easier.
Let’s start with Digit Sums. It is possible to take a number regardless of how big it is and transform it into a single digit. You can start with the number 15. In order to get it down to just one digit, you would add the two numbers together which would equal 6. This means that the digit sum of 15 is 6. It is also possible to do this with larger numbers such as 547. You would begin by adding 5 and 4 together which would be 9 then you would add 9 and 7 together which would be 16. However, you still got two digits so you would need to add 1 and 6 together which would be 7. With a bigger number such as 72546 you would add 7 and 2 which is 9 then 9 and 5 which is 14. 14 and 4 would equal 18 and finally 18 and 6 would equal 24. Finally, 2 plus 4 equals 6 so the digit sum of 72546 equals 6. This can be rather frustrating with larger numbers.
Thankfully, there is another way to shorten it down and make it easier.
Okay, now you’re probably wondering where casting out the 9s comes into play in this situation. When it comes to digit sums, it is possible to regard 9 as a 0. This basically means that you can cast out the 9s when working with digit sums. Then you would add the remaining digits together to get the digit sum. Let’s work with the numbers mentioned above. Let’s look at 547. 5 plus 4 is equal to 9. We can quickly eliminate these two numbers since they are equal to 9 when added together. Therefore, we are left with 7. This is the same answer we got above.
We just got with much easier and quicker when casting out the 9s. Okay, now let’s look at 72546 which was rather complicated to break down and get the digit sum earlier. 7 plus 2 is equal to 9 which can be casted out. 5 and 4 is also equaled to 9 and can also be casted out. This leaves us with 6 which is the same sum digit that we received using the more complicated method above.
Identity theft on Facebook?
9 May 2008
I’m a little surprised you don’t hear about this sort of thing happening more often:
A Roncalli High School administrator is asking a judge to force the Internet site Facebook to identify the pranksters who hijacked his identity for a phony Webpage.
Tim Puntarelli, Roncalli [High School]’s dean of students, and the Roman Catholic Archdiocese is suing Facebook and the anonymous creators of the false Webpage the suit claims contained false, embarrassing, and defaming information about Puntarelli and Roncalli High School.
The page creators used the Facebook page to pose as Puntarelli and send emails to Roncalli students, according to the lawsuit filed Thursday in Marion Superior Court.
Facebook officials removed the page when they were notified of the site on April 18, but refused to disclose the identity of the creators without a court order, according to the lawsuit.
Puntarelli and the Archdiocese are asking a judge to order Facebook to identify the creators of the page. The suit indicates they want the pranksters to pay triple the attorney fees and court costs.
I’m also somewhat surprised that Facebook is so reluctant to hand over the identity of the kids (presumably kids, at least) who set up this phony web page when they freely admit that the page is phony and the administrator’s identity was hijacked. Why should you need a court order for this?