作者JimmyWr (独立与自由)
看板Economics
标题[考试] 两题计量经济
时间Sun Apr 20 18:41:39 2008
来源: 经济数学 Alpha C. Chian
科目: 经济数学 Ch12 Optmization with equality Constrains
问题:
题目中说的12.22式 f(v)≧f(u) => { Σfj(u)(vj-uj) }
{ Σfj(v)(vj-uj) } ≧0
{ }
The function z=f(X1,X2)= X1X2 (X1,X2 ≧0) is quasiconcave .
(半凹的吗?)
We shall now check it. Let u= (u1,u2) and v=(v1,v2)
be any two points in the domain. Then f(u)=u1u2 and f(v)=V1V2
assume that: f(v)≧f(u) or v1v2≧u1u2 (v1 v2 u1 u2≧0) (12.27)
since the partial derivitives of are f1=x2 and f2=x1 12.22式 amounts
to the condition that (请问这边f的偏导数根下面推出的方程式有何关系?)
f1(u)(v1-u1)+f2(u)(v2-u2) = u2(v1-u1)-u1(v2-u2) ≧0
(为何透过导数可以判定需要都以 u去测度?
以及f1(u)和f2(u)为何等於 u2和u1 ?? 下面12.28的式子怎麽来的)
or upon rearangement ,
u2(v1-u1)≧u1(u2-v2) (12.28)
we need to consider four possiblities regarding the value of u1 and u2
First, if u1=u2=0 then 12.28 is trivially satisfied. Second ,
if u1=0 but u2>0 then 12.28 reduce to the condition u2v1≧0. which is again
(违反的意思吗?? 那为何可推出使u2 v1不为负成立)
satisfied since u2 and v1 are both nonnegtive.
Third , if u1>0 and u2=0 then (12.28) reduce to the condition 0≧-u1v2,
(也同样是违反0≧-u1v2吗 那又为何等是成立?)
which is still satisfied.
Last, suppose that u1 and u2 are both possitive
so that u1 and u2 are both possitive , so that v1 and v2 are also positive.
(这边比较没问题)
Subtracting v2u1 from both sides of (12.27), we obtain
v2(v1-u1)≧u1(u2-v2) (12.29)
(这边还看的懂 只是不知道同时减掉 v2u1的用意??)
Three subpossibilities now present themselves.
(不懂这个单字?? 推测??)
1.If u2=v2 then v1≧u1 .In fact , we should have v1>u1 since (v1,v2) are
distinct points. (不懂?? u2=v2不是会使等号右边变成0? 那怎麽又推得
v1≧u1 以及distinct point 的 v1>u1? 不是也应该是 v1=u1??
The fact that u2=v2 and v1>u1 implies that condition(12.28 is satisfied)
2.If u2>v2 , then we must also have v1>u1 by(12.29) .Multiplying both sides
of (12.29) by u2/v2 , we get
u2(v1-u1)≧ u2/v2[u1(u2-v2)]>u1(u2-v2) [since u2/v2 >1 ] (12.30)
Thus 12.28 is again satisfied (这边我看的懂 我比较没意见)
3. The final subpossiblities is that u2<v2, implying that u2/v2 is a positive
fraction. In this case . the first line of (12.30) still holds.
The second line also holds , but now for a different reason:
(以上我还能够理解 下面两句就看不懂 )
a fraction (u2/v2) of a negative number (u2-v2)
is greater than the latter number itself.
请问 整个题目的中心主旨 就是在映证 原本
透过12.27的假设而来的 12.28恒等式吗 u2(v1-u1)≧u1(u2-v2)
题目太复杂了 又有用到一些特别的英文 烦请高手 感激不尽
--
Anything, without blind insistence, is right.
--
※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 218.162.195.144
1F:→ ashugh:经济数学=/=计量经济140.119.204.121 04/20 20:24
2F:推 akai0928:同意楼上,原po改一下标题吧...140.134.110.252 04/20 23:38
3F:推 ian227:好奇为甚麽很多人会把经数与计经混乱。。140.119.129.122 04/21 15:42
4F:推 goshfju:嗯 前面才一篇搞混的 218.167.74.128 04/22 01:19
5F:→ jigga:推一楼 XD 76.180.138.82 04/22 22:29
6F:推 qqjong:reduce to....应该是化简,简化的意思...218.163.153.252 05/02 16:02
7F:→ qqjong:Three subpossibilities...他们本身下有3种218.163.153.252 05/02 16:03
8F:→ qqjong:可能性218.163.153.252 05/02 16:06