- #1
gnome
- 1,041
- 1
Given this statement "[tex]T^k_{s,i}[/tex] is exponentially distributed, and the parameter [tex]\alpha[/tex] in the distribution of [tex]T^k_{s,i}[/tex] depends only on the maximum expected surplus [tex]S^k_{s,i}[/tex] of seller i on the length T of the trading period, and on [tex]t_k[/tex], the time elapsed in the trading period. We write this dependence as
[tex]
\mbox{\Huge \alpha = f_{s,i}(S^k_{s,i};\, t_k,\, T)}
[/tex]
..."
In that last expression what is the significance of the separation of the [tex]S^k_{s,i}[/tex] from the [tex]t_k, T[/tex] by a semicolon, as contrasted with the separation of the latter two terms by a comma? It's clearly not accidental -- they follow this notation several times in the paper.
[tex]
\mbox{\Huge \alpha = f_{s,i}(S^k_{s,i};\, t_k,\, T)}
[/tex]
..."
In that last expression what is the significance of the separation of the [tex]S^k_{s,i}[/tex] from the [tex]t_k, T[/tex] by a semicolon, as contrasted with the separation of the latter two terms by a comma? It's clearly not accidental -- they follow this notation several times in the paper.