We expect that the present model can be extended to explicitly model the interactions between rivalry, memory, and attention.
Similar rate models are often used in the rivalry literature (Wilson et al. [32, 33]).
The rivalry is modeled through a network, an arc between a pair of buyers indicates that a buyer considers another buyer its rival, and the magnitude of the loss is the private information of each buyer.
There are models concerned more generally with sustained binocular rivalry and in these models there is an acknowledgment that the rivalry process must begin with one stimulus gaining initial dominance over the other.
Although the model of interhemispheric rivalry has been used to support the idea that excitatory tDCS should be applied to the stroke hemisphere to optimise recovery, the corollary argument that inhibition of the right hemisphere with tDCS is beneficial requires further research.
THE rivalry between different models of corporate governance partly reflects a broader battle over the best way of financing a modern economy.
In any case, the model of interhemispheric rivalry [36], [37], [38], [39], which provides the rationale for many tDCS studies on stroke rehabilitation [40], predicts that both left cathodal stimulation and right anodal stimulation would have similar net effects on overall hemispheric balance.
The cyclopean view is measured by two quality assessment methods, i.e., QA5 and QA8, which are both under the third (local) cyclopean view model; binocular rivalry is evaluated using QA3; and the depth quality is measured using the disparity map with QA1 and QA8.
Again, based on the model of interhemispheric rivalry, in such cases tDCS could be applied to the right hemisphere to enhance residual output from the stroke-damaged hemisphere by removing any potential interference, or reducing the excitability of the right hemisphere i.e., inhibitory stimulation of the contralesional, right hemisphere (see Figure 2).
Our aim is to construct a comprehensive model of rivalry that replicates the three key features common to all rivalry processes: leptokurtic dominance distributions, Levelt's propositions, and the role of memory, in particular for the phenomena related to stimulus blanking.
