Suchergebnisse

This paper extends the notion of individual minimal rights for a transferable utility game (TU-game) to coalitional minimal rights using minimal balanced families of a specific type, thus defining a corresponding minimal rights game. It is shown that the core of a TU-game coincides with the core of the corresponding minimal rights game. Moreover, the paper introduces the notion of the k-core cover as an extension of the core cover. The k-core cover of a TU-game consists of all efficient payoff vectors for which the total joint payoff for any coalition of size at most k is bounded from above by the value of this coalition in the corresponding dual game, and from below by the value of this coalition in the corresponding minimal rights game. It is shown that the core of a TU-game with player set N coincides with the ?|N |/2?-core cover. Furthermore, full characteriz ations of games for which a k-core cover is nonempty and for which a k-core cover coincides with the core are provided.

This paper extends the notion of individual minimal rights for a transferable utility game (TU-game) to coalitional minimal rights using minimal balanced families of a specific type, thus defining a corresponding minimal rights game. It is shown that the core of a TU-game coincides with the core of the corresponding minimal rights game. Moreover, the paper introduces the notion of the k-core cover as an extension of the core cover. The k-core cover of a TU-game consists of all efficient payoff vectors for which the total joint payoff for any coalition of size at most k is bounded from above by the value of this coalition in the corresponding dual game, and from below by the value of this coalition in the corresponding minimal rights game. It is shown that the core of a TU-game with player set N coincides with the b jNj 2 c-core cover. Furthermore, full characterizations of games for which a k-core cover is nonempty and for which a k-core cover coincides with the core are provided. ; Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación | Ref. MTM2011-27731-C03

This paper extends the notion of individual minimal rights for a transferable utility game (TU-game) to coalitional minimal rights using minimal balanced families of a specific type, thus defining a corresponding minimal rights game. It is shown that the core of a TU-game coincides with the core of the corresponding minimal rights game. Moreover, the paper introduces the notion of the k-core cover as an extension of the core cover. The k-core cover of a TU-game consists of all efficient payoff vectors for which the total joint payoff for any coalition of size at most k is bounded from above by the value of this coalition in the corresponding dual game, and from below by the value of this coalition in the corresponding minimal rights game. It is shown that the core of a TU-game with player set N coincides with the b jNj 2 c-core cover. Furthermore, full characterizations of games for which a k-core cover is nonempty and for which a k-core cover coincides with the core are provided. ; Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación | Ref. MTM2011-27731-C03

Why Conservatives Should Stop Opposing the Common Core (Common Core: Yea)by Sol SternIn the past few decades – as progressives gained influence in universities and schools of education – the idea of a coherent, content-rich curriculum has been erased from America's classrooms. Now, for all its faults, the Common Core State Standards represent the best opportunity we have to restore that structure in our schools.In this Broadside, Sol Stern shows how both sides of the education spectrum have misrepresented the Common Core. The left regards the standards as a threat to their ideological hegemony

Abstract Human cognition is founded, in part, on four systems for representing objects, actions, number, and space. It may be based, as well, on a fifth system for representing social partners. Each system has deep roots in human phylogeny and ontogeny, and it guides and shapes the mental lives of adults. Converging research on human infants, non‐human primates, children and adults in diverse cultures can aid both understanding of these systems and attempts to overcome their limits.

California Hard Core is a narrative history of the pornographic film industry in California from 1967 to 1978, a moment when Americans openly made, displayed, and watched sexually explicit films. Two interrelated questions animate this project: Who moved the pornographic film from the margins of society to the mainstream of American film culture? What do their stories tell us about sex and sexuality in the U.S. in the last third of the twentieth century? The earlier academic literature concentrates on pornographic film and political debates surrounding it rather than industry participants and their contexts. The popular literature, meanwhile, is composed almost entirely of book-length oral histories and autobiographies of filmmakers and models. California Hard Core helps to close the divide between these two literatures by documenting not only an eye-level view of work from behind the camera, on the set, and in the movie theater, but also the ways in which consumers received pornographic films, placing the reader in the viewing position of audience members, police officers, lawyers, judges, and anti-pornography activists. I argue that in the late 1960s a small group of sexual entrepreneurs, motivated by profit and inspired by the sexual revolution, moved pornographic film from the illicit to the mainstream of American film culture. Hard core film put sex on display, both reflecting and advancing the central tenet of the sexual revolution, which sought to increase the visibility of sex above all else. This movement, however, was mediated by a give and take relationship with the state, a relationship that, in turn, rendered pornographic films relatively tame in comparison to the sexual fluidity that marked the personal and professional lives of industry participants. Their stories demonstrate that when it came to sexual behavior, the sexual revolution was more easily lived in the private realm than the public sphere because the state seemed to have far less influence in private spaces. Paradoxically, however, it was in those private spaces that the state ultimately had the most control over sexual behavior because the individual was unaware of its quiet internalizing, regulatory presence.

Constitutional criminal procedural rights are familiar to contemporary criminal law scholars and practitioners alike. But today, U.S. criminal justice may diverge substantially from its centuries-old framework when all three branches recognize only a core set of inviolable rights, implicitly or explicitly discarding others. This criminal procedural line drawing takes place when the U.S. criminal justice system engages in law enforcement cooperation with foreign criminal justice systems in order to advance criminal cases. This Article describes the two forms of this criminal procedural line drawing. The first is a "core criminal procedure" approach, rooted in fundamental rights, that arises in the exchange of electronic evidence but is related to two prior eras' cross-sovereign criminal procedural articulation—the Warren Court incorporation of the Bill of Rights' criminal procedural protections and engagement with international human rights instruments. Alternatively, courts today may use an ad hoc "outlier" approach, only excluding foreign evidence, convictions, or extradition requests in extreme circumstances that "shock the conscience." This Article argues that the former approach is superior to the latter, and argues for a methodology—rooted in constitutional law, international human rights, and comparative legal functionalism—for evaluating foreign legal systems. To support this argument, this Article draws on political theory concerned with global justice. This Article concludes by considering how core criminal procedure informs U.S. engagement with international criminal tribunals and investigative mechanisms.