The name is absent



10

The geometric context of the next theorem can be easily understood in two
dimension.

Theorem 3.5 Exclusion Theorem

Let a simplex P be given in standard form with the additional condition that
ff1≠i
t¾aa holds for all i = 1,    , n. Then the Labeling Rule precludes the

possibility of the coexistence of a completely labeled simplex of type I and a com-
pletely labeled simplex of type II. If P contains an integral point, then there exists
no completely labeled simplex of type II.

Proof: We only need to consider the case in which P contains an integral point,
say æ0, i.e.,
Ax0 ≤ b. Let us suppose to the contrary that there is a completely
labeled simplex of type
II, say σ(⅛1,π) with vertices x1, ■■■, xn+1, where π =
(τr(l), ∙ ∙ ∙ ,
π(n ⅛ 1)) is a permutation of the n ⅛ 1 elments of N, and

xt+1 = xt ⅛ q(π(if), i = 1, ∙ ∙ ∙ , n;

x1 = xn+1 + q(π(n + 1)).

Now it is easy to see that there exist nonnegative integers k^, ∙ ∙ ∙, such that

x1 = x° + ∑ k⅛(i),
ieN

and

min kl = 0.
heN n

Let

I = argmin{ π 1(∕z) ∣ kjl = max: k1j

Then there exist nonnegative integers kt1, - , ktn+1 such that

xt = x0 + ∑ ktjq(f)
j
N



More intriguing information

1. Comparison of Optimal Control Solutions in a Labor Market Model
2. The name is absent
3. THE INTERNATIONAL OUTLOOK FOR U.S. TOBACCO
4. Staying on the Dole
5. The name is absent
6. Workforce or Workfare?
7. Do Decision Makers' Debt-risk Attitudes Affect the Agency Costs of Debt?
8. The name is absent
9. Gerontocracy in Motion? – European Cross-Country Evidence on the Labor Market Consequences of Population Ageing
10. The name is absent