We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Testing vocabulary is similar to testing in other areas of language knowledge and use. The same criteria of reliability, validity, practicality, and washback need to be considered when designing and evaluating vocabulary tests. In some ways testing vocabulary is easier than testing grammatical knowledge or control of discourse because the units to test are more obviously separate. It is not too difficult to identify what a word type is. However, there are problems and issues and we look at these in this chapter. This chapter has two major divisions. The first major division looks at the purposes of vocabulary tests, covering diagnostic, placement, achievement, and proficiency tests. The second major division looks at different test formats, answering questions like: Should choices be given? Should words be tested in context? How can I measure words that learners don’t know well? This section covers a wide range of vocabulary test formats, along with comments on their design and use.
Users may have multiple concurrent options regarding different objects/resources and their decisions usually negatively influence each other’s utility, which makes the sequential decision-making problem more challenging. In this chapter, we introduce an Indian buffet game to study how users in a dynamic system learn about the uncertain system state and make multiple concurrent decisions by not only considering their current myopic utility, but also the influence of subsequent users’ decisions. We analyze the Indian buffet game under two different scenarios: one of customers requesting multiple dishes without budget constraints and the other with budget constraints. In both cases, we design recursive best-response algorithms to find the subgame-perfect Nash equilibrium for customers and characterize special properties of the Nash equilibrium profile in a homogeneous setting. Moreover, we introduce a non-Bayesian social learning algorithm by which customers can learn the system state, and we theoretically prove its convergence. Finally, we conduct simulations to validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the Indian buffet game.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.