Topic
Intransitive case
About: Intransitive case is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 2 publications have been published within this topic receiving 273 citations. The topic is also known as: passive case & patient case.
Papers
18 Jun 1991
TL;DR: This paper discusses the work of automatexperiencer; if a person who uses this concept ically extracting Case Frames from Machinebelieves that seeing is a process of active selecReadable Dictionaries based on a three layer tion, then this person will assign to its subject, a posteriori Case Theory[5].
Abstract: This paper discusses the work of automatexperiencer; if a person who uses this concept ically extracting Case Frames from Machinebelieves that seeing is a process of active selecReadable Dictionaries based on a three layer tion, then this person will assign to its subject, a posteriori Case Theory[5]. an active Case such as agent. The theory is intended to deal with two 3. c o n t e x t layer : in this layer, Cases problems: 1. To dynamically adjust grains of Cases. This is where a posteriori comes from. 2. To provide a procedure to determine Cases. This is where three layer comes from. The three layers are: 1. base layer: This layer is intended to accomplish transformations of words to concepts by explicating language and word specific implicants, e.g., for the verb eat in the intransitive case, its subject is eater, while for verb break in the intransitive case, its subject is the broken. 2. de fau l t layer: in this layer, implicit assumptions of naive theories are made explicit, e.g., for concept see, there are two different views towards its subject: if a person who uses this concept believes that seeing is just a process of passive perception, then this person will assign to its subject, a passive 1 Case such as
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors introduce two models of political party decision-making, i.e., the intransitive case and the transitive case, under the assumptions of perfect and imperfect information.
Abstract: The article introduces two models of political party decision making. Both models assume that the parties are solely interested in policy and that winning the election is just a means to that end. In one, the parties are competitive, while in the other the parties collude. The main result, in either case, is that the parties tend to be unresponsive to the interests of the voters.The models are analyzed in an intransitive case (an election concerned only with income distribution) and a transitive one (an election where all political attitudes can be put on a left-right continuum), and under the assumptions of perfect and imperfect information.With perfect information the intransitive case results in the parties ending up with all the income; while in the single peaked case neither party will have a position to the left (right) of the left (right) party's most preferred position whatever the attitudes of the voters.Finally it is shown that it is rational for the parties to collude and present similar platforms.
Related Topics (5)
Performance Metrics
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 1991 | 1 |
| 1973 | 1 |