15 Pages

l10_dyn_sche_exe

Course: COG 3171, Spring 2005
School: UCLA
Rating:
 
 
 
 
 

Word Count: 2592

Document Preview

Plan Outline Temporal Execution: Dynamic Scheduling and Simple Temporal Networks Review: Constraint -based Interval Planning Simple Temporal Networks Temporal Consistency and Scheduling Execution Under Uncertainty Brian C. Williams 16.412J/6.834J March 7th, 2005 1 Simple Spacecraft Problem Observation-1 Example Init pointing target instruments Actions pC pC calibrated C px Observation-2 Goal...

Register Now

Unformatted Document Excerpt

Coursehero >> California >> UCLA >> COG 3171

Course Hero has millions of student submitted documents similar to the one
below including study guides, practice problems, reference materials, practice exams, textbook help and tutor support.

Course Hero has millions of student submitted documents similar to the one below including study guides, practice problems, reference materials, practice exams, textbook help and tutor support.
Plan Outline Temporal Execution: Dynamic Scheduling and Simple Temporal Networks Review: Constraint -based Interval Planning Simple Temporal Networks Temporal Consistency and Scheduling Execution Under Uncertainty Brian C. Williams 16.412J/6.834J March 7th, 2005 1 Simple Spacecraft Problem Observation-1 Example Init pointing target instruments Actions pC pC calibrated C px Observation-2 Goal Ty Observation-3 c py Observation-4 px c Im Ix px 16.410/13: Solved using Graph -based Planners (Blum & Furst ) Partial Order Causal Link Planning Needed Extensions (SNLP, UCPOP) IA 1. Select an open condition c 2. Choose an op that can achieve it pA Link to an existing instance Add a new instance pC C 3. Resolve threats Im C pA C pC TA S Im IA Time Resources F Utility c S pC F c pA pC F IA Im IA F Uncertainty c pA Im IA F pC C S p C c pA pC Im IA F TA p C B ased on slides by Dave Smith, NASA Ames IA Representing Timing: Qualitative Temporal Relations [Allen AAAI83] A before B A A meets B A TakeImage Pictorially B B TakeImage (?target, ?instr) contained-by Status(?instr, Calibrated) contained-by Pointing(?target) meets Image(?target) A A overlaps B B A A contains B B Pointing(?target) A A=B contains B TakeImage(?target, ?instr) A A starts B meets Image(?target) contains B Status(?instr, Calibrated) A A ends B B ased on slides by Dave Smith, NASA Ames B B ased on slides by Dave Smith, NASA Ames A Consistent Complete Temporal Plan A Temporal Planning Problem Turn(A7) Pointing(Earth) Pointing(Earth) meets meets T urn(T17) meets Past -8 Image(?target) meets meets Status(Cam2, On) P ast T akeImage(A7, Cam2) Future contains meets meets S tatus(Cam2, On) -8 Calibrate(Cam2) meets meets Pointing(T17) Status(Cam1, Off) Status(Cam1, Off) Pointing(A7) contains meets Future Image(A7) 8 contains meets S tatus(Cam2, Calibrated) contains 8 C alibrationTarget(T17) CalibrationTarget(T17) B ased on slides by Dave Smith, NASA Ames B ased on slides by Dave Smith, NASA Ames A Consistent Complete Temporal Plan CBI Planning Algorithm Choose: Turn(A7) Pointing(Earth) introduce an action & instantiate constraints coalesce propositions Propagate temporal constraints meets meets T urn(T17) meets T akeImage(A7, Cam2) -8 contains meets S tatus(Cam2, On) meets Calibrate(Cam2) contains meets S tatus(Cam2, Calibrated) contains C alibrationTarget(T17) Planner Must: Check schedulability of candidate plans for correctness. Schedule the activities of a complete plan in order to execute. B ased on slides by Dave Smith, NASA Ames meets meets Pointing(T17) Status(Cam1, Off) P ast Pointing(A7) contains meets Image(A7) Future 8 Relation to Causal Links & Threats POCL Examples of CBI Planners CBI Zeno (Penberthy) intervals, no CSP Causal links: meets proposition action action action Trains (Allen) meets proposition action Descartes (Joslin) extreme least commitment IxTeT (Ghallab) action proposition EUROPA (Jonsson) action functional rep., activities HTN mutex threatens action proposition B ased on slides by Dave Smith, NASA Ames action B ased on slides by Dave Smith, NASA Ames Qualitative Temporal Constraints Maybe Expressed as Inequalities Outline functional rep., activities Kirk (Williams) proposition action functional rep. HSTS (Muscettola) Threats : Review: Constraint -based Interval Planning Simple Temporal Networks Temporal Consistency and Scheduling Execution Under Uncertainty (Vilain , Kautz 86) X+ < Y X+ = Y (Y < X+) & (X- < (Y < X-) & (X+ < (X = Y-) & (X+ < (X < Y-) & (X+ = (X = Y-) & (X+ = x before y x meets y x overlaps y x during y x starts y x finishes y x equals y Y+) Y+) Y+) Y+) Y+) Inequalities may be expressed as binary interval relations: Y- - X+ < [0, +inf] Generalize to include metric constraints: Y- - X+ < [lb, ub] B ased on slides by Dave Smith, NASA Ames B ased on slides by Dave Smith, NASA Ames Metric Time: Temporal CSPS (Dechter, Meiri, Pearl 91) TCSP Are Visualized Using Directed Constraint Graphs Bread should be eaten within a day of baking. ? 0 < [T +(baking) T -(eating)] < 1 day 0 1 3 [10,20] Xi continuous variables interval constraints T i ,T ij {I1, . . . ,In } where Ii = [ai,bi] 2 T i = (ai Xi bi) or . . . or (ai Xi bi) T ij = (a1 Xi - Xj b1) or ... or (an Xi - Xj bn) B ased on slides by Dave Smith, NASA Ames [30,40] [60,inf] [10,20] < Xi , Ti , T ij > [20,30] [40,50] [60,70] B ased on slides by Dave Smith, NASA Ames 4 Simple Temporal Networks (STNs) (Dechter, Meiri, Pearl 91) A Temporal Plan Forms an STN Temporal At most one interval per constraint T ij = (aij Xi - Xj bij ) Delta_V(direction=b, magnitude=200) [30,40] [60,inf] [10,20] 0 Thrust Goals 1 3 Power [10,20] Cant represent: Disjoint activities Attitude Sufficient to represent: most Allen relations simple metric constraints [20,30] [40,50] Point(a) Turn(a,b) Engine 2 Off Point(b) Turn(b,a) 4 Warm Up Thrust (b, 200) Off [60,70] A Temporal Plan Forms an STN Temporal [1035, 1035] [0, 300] Outline [0, + ] [0, + ] <0, 0> Review: Constraint -based Interval Planning Simple Temporal Networks Temporal Consistency and Scheduling Execution Under Uncertainty [0, 0] [130,170] To Query an STN, Map to a Distance Graph Gd = < V,Ed > TCSP Queries (Dechter , Meiri, Pearl, AIJ91) Is the TCSP consistent? Planning What are the feasible times for each Xi? Planning What are the feasible durations between Planning each Xi and Xj ? What is a consistent set of times? What are the earliest possible times? What are the latest possible times? Scheduling Scheduling Edge encodes an upper bound on distance to target from source. Negative edges are lower bounds. Xj - Xi bij Xi - Xj - aij T ij = (aij Xj - Xi bij ) 0 [10,20] 1 [30,40] 3 0 20 [40,50] 20 4 2 -60 [60,70] 3 -30 [10,20] 2 40 1 -10 70 50 -40 -10 4 Conjoined Paths Computed using All Pairs Shortest Path Gd Induces Constraints (e.g., Floyd -Warshall, Johnson) 1. for i := 1 to n do dii 0; 2. for i, j := 1 to n do dij aij ; Path constraint: i0 =i, i1 = . . ., ik = j k X j - Xi ai j -1 ,i j Initialize distances j=1 3. for k := 1 to n do 4. for i, j := 1 to n do 5. dij min{dij , dik + dkj }; ? Conjoined path constraints result in the shortest path as bound: X j - X i d ij Take minimum distance over all triangles k i where dij is the shortest path from i to j j Shortest Paths of Gd 0 0 1 0 2 0 50 30 70 1 -10 0 2 -40 -30 2 3 4 0 20 Map To STN Minimum Network -10 0 -10 30 0 2 -30 -10 20 40 20 60 3 -20 -10 20 40 1 50 -40 3 50 4 0 0 0 3 4 0 0 20 50 30 70 0 3 [60,70] [0] [30,40] [10,20] [50,60] 3 -20 -10 20 0 50 4 -60 -50 -20 -40 0 3 [-30,-20] [-20,-10] [10,20] 2 [-50,-40] [-40,-30] [0] 4 [-20,-10] [20,30] [0] [40,50] 4 [-70,-60] [-60,-50] [-30,-20] [-50,-40] [0] STN minimum network Scheduling: Latest Solution Node 0 is the reference. 20 2 -40 -30 0 -10 30 3 -20 -10 20 0 50 4 -60 -50 -20 -40 0 40 1 -10 2 -30 -10 20 40 20 60 d-graph 2 1 [-20,-10] d-graph No negative cycles: -5 > TA TA = 0 1 -10 0 [40,50] [20,30] 1 -10 0 40 20 60 2 -40 -30 0 -10 30 Schedulability: Plan Consistency 2 [10,20] 70 d-graph 1 1 [0] 0 -60 4 -60 -50 -20 -40 0 0 0 1234 20 50 30 70 3 50 -40 4 0 1 2 S1 = (d01, . . . , d0n) 3 4 0 0 20 50 30 70 1 -10 0 40 20 60 2 -40 -30 0 -10 30 0 20 40 1 -10 20 50 -40 3 -60 3 -20 -10 20 0 50 -60 70 4 -60 -50 -20 -40 0 70 d-graph 2 -30 -10 4 Scheduling: Window of Feasible Values Scheduling: Earliest Solution Node 0 is the reference. 0 1 S1 = (-d10, . . . , -dn0) 2 3 4 0 0 20 50 30 70 0 20 40 1 -10 -10 20 1 -10 0 40 20 60 2 -40 -30 0 -10 30 2 -30 50 -40 3 4 -60 3 -20 -10 20 0 50 4 -60 -50 -20 -40 0 70 0 00 4 X3 in [20, 30] 4 -60 -50 -20 -40 0 X4 in [60, 70] X2 in [40, 50] Solution by Decomposition Can assign variables in any order, without backtracking. 2 3 2 -40 -30 0 -10 30 3 -20 -10 20 0 50 Scheduling without Search: Solution by Decomposition 1 2 Earliest Times d-graph d-graph 0 1 0 0 20 50 30 70 Latest Times 1 -10 0 40 20 60 X1 in [10, 20] 3 4 20 50 30 70 Select value for 1 15 [10,20] Can assign variables in any order, without backtracking. 0 00 1 2 3 4 20 50 30 70 1 -10 0 40 20 60 2 -40 -30 0 -10 30 3 -20 -10 20 15 [10,20] 1 -10 0 40 20 60 2 -40 -30 0 -10 30 3 -20 -10 20 Select value for 1 0 50 0 50 4 -60 -50 -20 -40 0 4 -60 -50 -20 -40 0 d-graph d-graph Solution by Decomposition Solution by Decomposition Can assign variables in any order, without backtracking. Tighten bound of Y using all selected X: Y X + |XY| 0 1 2 3 4 0 0 20 50 30 70 1 -10 0 40 20 60 2 -40 -30 0 -10 30 Select value for 1 15 Select value for 2, consistent with 1 45 [40,50], 15+[30,40] Can assign variables in any order, without backtracking. Tighten bound of Y using all selected X: Y X + |XY| 0 1 2 3 4 0 0 20 50 30 70 1 -10 0 40 20 60 2 -40 -30 0 -10 30 3 -20 -10 20 0 50 3 -20 -10 20 0 50 4 -60 -50 -20 -40 0 4 -60 -50 -20 -40 0 d-graph d-graph Select for value 1 15 Select value for 2, consistent with 1 45 [45,50] Solution by Decomposition Solution by Decomposition Can assign variables in any order, without backtracking. Tighten bound of Y using all selected X: Y X + |XY| 0 1 2 3 4 0 0 20 50 30 70 1 -10 0 40 20 60 2 -40 -30 0 -10 30 Can assign variables in any order, without backtracking. Tighten bound of Y using all selected X: Y X + |XY| Select value for 1 0 15 Select value for 2, consistent with 1 45 1 2 3 4 0 0 20 50 30 70 1 -10 0 40 20 60 2 -40 -30 0 -10 30 [45,50] Select value for 1 15 Select value for 2, consistent with 1 45 Select value for 3, consistent with 1 & 2 3 -20 -10 20 0 50 3 -20 -10 20 0 50 4 -60 -50 -20 -40 0 4 -60 -50 -20 -40 0 d-graph d-graph Solution by Decomposition Solution by Decomposition Can assign variables in any order, without backtracking. Tighten bound of Y using all selected X: Y X + |XY| 0 1 2 3 4 0 0 20 50 30 70 1 -10 0 40 20 60 2 -40 -30 0 -10 30 3 -20 -10 20 0 50 4 -60 -50 -20 -40 0 d-graph 0 15 Select value for 2, consistent with 1 1 2 3 4 0 0 20 50 30 70 1 -10 0 40 20 60 2 -40 -30 0 -10 30 3 -20 -10 20 0 50 4 -60 -50 -20 -40 0 d-graph O(N 2) 45 Select value for 3, consistent with 1 & 2 30 Select value for 4, consistent with 1,2 & 3 3 4 3 -20 -10 20 0 50 4 -60 -50 -20 -40 0 30 [25,30] 15 Select value for 2, consistent with 1 2 1 -10 0 40 20 60 2 -40 -30 0 -10 30 45 Select value for 3, consistent with 1 & 2 Select value for 1 1 0 0 20 50 30 70 Select value for 1 15 Select value for 2, consistent with 1 45 Select value for 3, consistent with 1 & 2 d-graph Solution by Decomposition 0 [20,30], 15+[10,20],45+[ - 20,-10] Can assign variables in any order, without backtracking. Tighten bound of Y using all selected X: Y X + |XY| Select value for 1 Can assign variables in any order, without backtracking. Tighten bound of Y using all selected X: Y X + |XY| 30 30 [25,30] Outline Review: Constraint -based Interval Planning Simple Temporal Networks Temporal Consistency and Scheduling Execution Under Uncertainty Executing Flexible Temporal Plans [Muscettola, Morris, Pell et al.] Handling delays and fluctuations in task duration: Least commitment temporal plans leave room to adapt. EXECUTIVE Issues in Flexible Execution 1. How do we minimize execution latency? 2. How do we schedule at execution time? CONTROLLED SYSTEM Flexible execution adapts through dynamic scheduling. Assigns time to event when executed. Time Propagation Can Be Costly Time Propagation Can Be Costly EXECUTIVE EXECUTIVE CONTROLLED SYSTEM CONTROLLED SYSTEM Time Propagation Can Be Costly Time Propagation Can Be Costly EXECUTIVE EXECUTIVE CONTROLLED SYSTEM CONTROLLED SYSTEM Time Propagation Can Be Costly Time Propagation Can Be Costly EXECUTIVE EXECUTIVE CONTROLLED SYSTEM CONTROLLED SYSTEM Issues in Flexible Execution Compile to Efficient Network 1. How do we minimize execution latency? Propagate through a small set of neighboring constraints. 2. How do we schedule at execution time? EXECUTIVE CONTROLLED SYSTEM Compile to Efficient Network Compile to Efficient Network EXECUTIVE EXECUTIVE CONTROLLED SYSTEM CONTROLLED SYSTEM Issues in Flexible Execution Issues in Flexible Execution 1. How do we minimize execution latency? Propagate through a small set of neighboring constraints. 1. How do we minimize execution latency? Propagate through a small set of neighboring constraints. 2. How do we schedule at execution time? 2. How do we schedule at execution time? Through decomposition? Dynamic Scheduling by Decomposition Dynamic Scheduling by Decomposition Compute APSP graph Decomposition enables assignment without search 11 10 [0,10] B [1,1] D [0,10] C 0 A 1 -2 D 0 A 0 C [2,2] 10 2 Equivalent Distance Graph Representation Simple Example Assignment by Decomposition Select executable timepoint and assign Propagate assignment to neighbors 1 -1 10 -1 B 0 A 10 -1 B 1 0 A D -2 <0,10> 10 t=0 0 A 0 1 1 -1 Equivalent All Pairs Shortest Paths (APSP) Representation Assignment by Decomposition Select executable timepoint and assign Propagate assignment to neighbors <0,10> -2 -1 B <2,11> <0,0> 0 A -2 0 C 10 11 t=3 10 D 1 1 -1 D -2 C 2 D 10 2 Equivalent Distance Graph Representation -2 -1 B -2 C 2 11 10 1 C 10 -1 B 0 <0,10> -2 2 <2,11> Assignment by Decomposition Select executable timepoint and assign Propagate assignment to neighbors But C now has to be executed at t =2, which is already in the past! Solution: Assignments must monotonically increase in value. 11 t=3 10 <0,0> First execute all APSP neighbors with negative delays. 0 A 0 1 1 -1 Execute an event when enabled and active Enabled - APSP Predecessors are completed Predecessor a destination of a negative edge that starts at event. Active -1 B Dispatching Execution Controller D - Current time within bound of task. <4,4> -2 C 2 <2,2> 10 -2 Dispatching Execution Controller Initially: E = Time points w/o predecessors S = {} Repeat: 1. Wait until current_time has advanced st EXECUTIVE a. Some TP in E is active b. All time points in E are still enabled. 2. Set TPs execution time to current_time. 3. Add TP to S. 4. Propagate time of execution to TPs APSP immediate neighbors. 5. Add to A, all immediate neighbors that became enabled. a. TPx enabled if all negative edges starting at TPx have their destination in S. Propagation Example S = {A} Propagation is Focused Propagate forward along positive edges to tighten upper bounds. forward prop along negative edges is useless. Propagate backward along negative edges to tighten lower bounds. Backward prop along positive edges useless. Propagation Example S = {A} 11 <0,0> A 10 -1 0 9 11 <1,10> B -1 <0,0> 1 1 -1 D 0 -2 C 2 -2 A 10 -1 9 B -1 1 1 -1 D -2 C 2 -2 Propagation Example Propagation Example S = {A} S = {A} 11 <1,10> < 0,0> A 10 -1 0 11 <1,10> B -1 <0,0> 1 1 -1 D A 0 -2 C 9 -1 D -2 C 2 <0,9> -2 Propagation Example <2,11> 1 1 -1 9 2 <0,9> -2 B 10 -1 Reducing Execution Latency S = {A} Filtering: Execution time is: E= {C} some edges are redundant worst case O(n ) remove redundant edges best case 11 <1,10> < 0,0> A 10 -1 0 9 O(n ) B -1 1 1 -1 11 <2,11> 10 D C <0,9> -2 <0,0> 2 0 A 0 Edge Domination The thread running through A-B-C is always just as fast or faster than the thread running through A-C -1 1 -1 1 D <2,11> -2 C 10 BC upper-dominates AC if in every consistent execution, TB + b(B,C) T A + b(A,C) t=3 B -2 <0,10> 2 -2 Edge Domination AB lower-dominates AC if in every consistent execution, TB - b(A,B) TC - b(A,C) A B C A B Enablement of node A is always determined by thread running through A-B-C C Edge Dominance Edge Dominance Eliminate edge that is redundant due to the triangle inequality AB + BC = AC Eliminate edge that is redundant due to the triangle inequality AB + BC = AC 150 A 150 B -100 80 -50 A 80 -20 C -50 Edge Dominance A B -100 80 -50 80 -20 C -50 An Example of Edge Filtering Start off with the APSP network B 1 -1 C -2 C An Example of Edge Filtering Start at A-B-C triangle 11 0 C 150 B -100 9 -20 Eliminate edge that is redundant due to the triangle inequality AB + BC = AC 150 A A 100 Edge Dominance Eliminate edge that is redundant due to the triangle inequality AB + BC = AC 10 -1 B -100 100 11 -1 1 -2 D 2 A 10 -1 0 9 B 1 -1 C -2 -1 1 -2 2 D An Example of Edge Filtering Look at B-D-C triangle An Example of Edge Filtering Look at B-D-C triangle 11 11 B -1 A 0 1 -1 1 -2 C 9 B -1 D -1 A 0 -1 1 -2 C 9 2 1 -1 D 2 -2 An Example of Edge Filtering Look at D-A-B triangle An Example of Edge Filtering Look at D-A-C triangle 11 11 B -1 A 0 1 -1 1 C 9 B -1 D 2 Look at B-C-D triangle 0 9 C 1 -1 -1 1 C D 2 An Example of Edge Filtering Look at B-C-D triangle B 1 -1 0 9 An Example of Edge Filtering A A B -1 1 D 2 A 0 9 1 -1 C -1 1 D An Example of Edge Filtering Resulting network has less edges than the original A 9 C 0 1 Node Contraction Collapse two events with fixed time between them D -1 -1 B |LB| 10 -1 B A 1 B Additional Filtering 0 1 0 -2 C 10 D A |AL| 2 Additional Filtering Node Contraction Collapse two events with fixed time between them An Example of Node Contraction Resulting network has less edges than the original A 9 0 |LB| |BL| |LA| L C 1 1 B D -1 -1 B 9 A |BL| Avoiding Intermediate Graph Explosion Problem: APSP consumes O(n2) space. Solution: Interleave process of APSP construction with edge elimination Never have to build whole APSP graph CBD 0 AL Goals and Environment Constraints Temporal Planner Temporal Network Solver Projective Task Expansion Temporal Plan Dynamic Scheduling and Task Dispatch Modes Goals Model-based Programming & Task Execution Observations Task Dispatch Commands Reactive Task Expansion
Find millions of documents on Course Hero - Study Guides, Lecture Notes, Reference Materials, Practice Exams and more. Course Hero has millions of course specific materials providing students with the best way to expand their education.

Below is a small sample set of documents:

UCLA - COG - 3171
Mission Goals andEnvironment ConstraintsRobust Task Execution:Procedural and Model-basedTemporalPlannerInitial ConditionsTemporalNetworkSolverTemporal PlanDynamic Schedulingand Task DispatchModesBrian C. Williams16.412J/6.834JMarch 14th, 2
UCLA - COG - 3171
RMPL Model-based ProgramReactive Planning of Hidden Statesin Large State Spaces ThroughDecomposition and SerializationControl ProgramExecutes concurrently Preempts non -deterministic choice A[l,u ] timing A at llocationBrian C. WilliamsEnviron
UCLA - COG - 3171
OutlineIncrementalPath PlanningOptimal Path Planning inPartially Known Environments. Continuous Optimal Path PlanningDynamicA*IncrementalContinuous Planning and Dynamic A*A* (LRTA*) [Appendix]Prof. Brian Williams(help from Ihsiang Shu)16.412/
UCLA - COG - 3171
Visual Interpretation using Probabilistic Grammars Paul RobertsonModel-Based Vision What do the models look like Where do the models come from How are the models utilized2The Problem345Optimization/Search ProblemFind the most likely interpret
UCLA - COG - 3171
Dialogue as aDecision Making ProcessChallenges of Autonomy in the RealWorldWide range of sensorsNoisy sensorsWorld dynamicsAdaptabilityIncomplete informationNicholas RoyRobustness underuncertaintyMinervaPearlPredicted Health Care NeedsSpoke
FAU - ACCOUNTING - 3141
Chapter 10 - Sole Proprietorships, Partnerships, LLCs, and SCorporationsChapter10QuestionsandProblemsforDiscussion1.Asoleproprietorshipisnotalegalentitybutmerelyabusinessactivitycarriedonbyanindividual.Theproprietorispersonallyliabletothebusinesscre
FAU - ACCOUNTING - 3141
FactorsSole Prop (SP) Unlimite d Liability and can loose assets-General Partnership GP equally liable unless the agreement Says otherwiseLimited Partnership (LLP)Personal LiabilityLimited Liability Company (LLC) Unlimited Members are personal not lia
FAU - ACCOUNTING - 3141
Marcia and Dave are separated and negotiating a divorce agreement. They live in a common law state and have two children who will remain with Marcia. Dave is willing to transfer the jointly owned home to Marcia. He wishes to keep the couple's jointly own
FAU - ACCOUNTING - 4041
The mission of the FASB is to establish and improve standards of financial accounting and reporting that foster financial reporting by nongovernmental entities that provides decision-useful information to investors and other users of financial reports. Th
FAU - TAX - 4001
The Earned Income Credit (EIC) is a refundable tax credit available to eligible taxpayers who do not earn high incomes. The purpose of the EIC is to reduce the tax burden and supplement the wages of working families whose earnings are less than the maximu
FAU - TAX - 4001
User Submitted Name Status ScoreDanielle Shaw 7/26/10 7:41 PM Ex310Su2 Completed 88 out of 100 pointsTime Elapsed 0 hours, 43 minutes, and 54 seconds out of 1 hours and 5 minutes allowed. Instructions Question 1 A Greenfield investment _. Selected Answe
FAU - MAN - 3600
SWOTLOCALEStrengths:oANAYLSISReasonable climate and scenic beauty. As with food precautions, climate security allows the natives of Australia an opportunity to treat their financial and resource needs with leniency.oLow population densities except
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
&lt;?xml version=&quot;1.0&quot; encoding=&quot;UTF-8&quot;?&gt; &lt;Worksheet&gt;&lt;Version major=&quot;6&quot; minor=&quot;0&quot;/&gt;&lt;View-Properties&gt;&lt;Zoom percentage=&quot;100&quot;/&gt;&lt;/View-Properties&gt;&lt;Styles&gt;&lt;Layout alignment=&quot;left&quot; bullet=&quot;none&quot; name=&quot;Warning&quot;/&gt;&lt;Layout alignment=&quot;left&quot; bullet=&quot;none&quot; name=&quot;Heading
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
Rutgers - MATH - 640:244
University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign - ECON 102 - 102
Name: _ Date: _1. The marginal product of labor is the change in:A) labor divided by the change in total product.B) total output divided by the change in the quantity of labor.C) average output divided by the change in the quantity of labor.D) total