Mele treats self-controlled and weakly-willed conduct as two sides of the same coin (1995, p. 5).
Zeng et al. proposed robust versions of MP and OMP, coined ℓ p -MP and ℓ p -OMP, respectively, based on the notion of ℓ p -space correlation, with 0
To get a better feeling for this distinction, consider the experiment of tossing a biased coin having probability p of heads and q = 1 − p of tails until heads first appears.
For example, let X0 = x, and for n ≥ 1 let Xn equal 1 or −1 according as a coin having probability p of heads and q = 1 − p of tails turns up heads or tails on the nth toss.
Assume, then, that a biased coin having probability p = μδ of heads is tossed once in each time interval of length δ, so that by time t the total number of tosses is an integer n approximately equal to t/δ.
As stated by Brigandt, "developmental constraint and morphological evolvability are two sides of one coin" (Brigandt 2007, p. 710).
Others, instead, nuzzle into a Wednesday night time slot on Comedy Central, right after cult hit "Workaholics," and coin phrases like "p--sy weed".
Coins in poor (P), fair (F), about good (AG), or good (G) condition generally aren't fine enough for collectors.
The simplest statistical model for binary fingerprints is a sequence of independent identically distributed Bernoulli trials (coin flips) with probability p of producing a 1-bit, and q=1− p of producing a 0-bit.
If you're going to drop the coin on a Sony VAIO P, you better get a case.
Then by assumption, p 1 Coin α f ̃, g ̃ is an essential coincidence class, where p1 : G1 → M1 is the natural covering projection.
