Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Theory and Decision 2/2016

01.05.2015

The Anscombe–Aumann representation and the independence axiom: a reconsideration

verfasst von: Abhinash Borah, Christopher Kops

Erschienen in: Theory and Decision | Ausgabe 2/2016

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

We provide a new behavioral foundation for subjective expected utility (SEU) within the Anscombe–Aumann framework. In contrast to the original axiomatization of SEU, our behavioral foundation establishes that to be consistent with SEU maximization, we need not explicitly assume that preferences satisfy the independence axiom over the domain of all acts. Rather, the substantive implications of independence for an SEU representation may equivalently be derived from less demanding conditions over certain smaller classes of acts. These acts, which we refer to as uncertainty-free comparable acts, have the property that they are relatively simple for a decision maker to compare because she can rank acts within any such class based on her risk preferences alone, without having to consider the underlying uncertainty. Acts of this kind comprise constant acts and acts that are almost identical in the sense that they differ from one another in at most one state.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Fußnoten
1
For instance, the leading models accommodating ambiguity-sensitive behavior that have been proposed in the literature in the last two decades or so have mostly worked within this framework.
 
2
An act is constant if it gives the same objective lottery in each state.
 
3
This should also be evident from the fact that this axiom is weaker than the certainty independence axiom underlying the multiple prior model of Gilboa and Schmeidler (1989) that, of course, accommodates the Ellsberg preferences.
 
4
For instance, for any two acts from this set (other than \(b_E\)) and for any state outside \(E\), the ratio of the payment under these acts is constant.
 
5
In the earlier version of the paper, instead of UF C-independence, we had used an axiom stronger than it to establish this result. This axiom, which we referred to as uncertainty-free comparable independence, went as follows:
  • If each pair of acts \((f,f')\) and \((g,g')\) are uncertainty-free comparable, and furthermore \(f'\sim g'\), then \(f\succsim g\Leftrightarrow \alpha f+(1-\alpha )f'\succsim \alpha g+(1-\alpha )g'\).
One of our referees provided us with an alternative proof which showed that UF C-Independence, along with the other axioms, suffices for an SEU representation. The proof that we provide in the appendix for our representation result is along the lines suggested by this referee. We gratefully acknowledge the suggestion made by this referee toward strengthening our result and, accordingly, the argument of the paper.
 
6
For this case where the set of states is not finite, our earlier terminology of almost identical acts looses its intuitive appeal. So, it is not very instructive to introduce this terminology here. Rather, it is more useful to look at acts like \((p,f_{A^C})\) and \((q,f_{A^C})\) purely from the perspective of permitting uncertainty-free comparisons.
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Anscombe, F. J., & Aumann, R. J. (1963). A definition of subjective probability. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 34(1), 199–205.CrossRef Anscombe, F. J., & Aumann, R. J. (1963). A definition of subjective probability. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 34(1), 199–205.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Fishburn, P. C. (1970). Utility theory for decision making. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Fishburn, P. C. (1970). Utility theory for decision making. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Zurück zum Zitat Ghirardato, P., Maccheroni, F., & Marinacci, M. (2004). Differentiating ambiguity and ambiguity attitude. Journal of Economic Theory, 118(2), 133–173.CrossRef Ghirardato, P., Maccheroni, F., & Marinacci, M. (2004). Differentiating ambiguity and ambiguity attitude. Journal of Economic Theory, 118(2), 133–173.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Gilboa, I., & Schmeidler, D. (1989). Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 18, 141–153.CrossRef Gilboa, I., & Schmeidler, D. (1989). Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 18, 141–153.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Klibanoff, P., Marinacci, M., & Mukerji, S. (2005). A smooth model of decision making under ambiguity. Econometrica, 73, 1849–1892.CrossRef Klibanoff, P., Marinacci, M., & Mukerji, S. (2005). A smooth model of decision making under ambiguity. Econometrica, 73, 1849–1892.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Lehrer, E., & Teper, R. (2015). Subjective independence and concave expected utility. Journal of Economic Theory, 158, 33–53.CrossRef Lehrer, E., & Teper, R. (2015). Subjective independence and concave expected utility. Journal of Economic Theory, 158, 33–53.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat L’Haridon, O., & Placido, L. (2010). Betting on Machina’s reflection example: An experiment on ambiguity. Theory and Decision, 69(3), 375–393.CrossRef L’Haridon, O., & Placido, L. (2010). Betting on Machina’s reflection example: An experiment on ambiguity. Theory and Decision, 69(3), 375–393.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Maccheroni, F., Marinacci, M., & Rustichini, A. (2006). Ambiguity aversion, robustness and the variational representation of preferences. Econometrica, 74, 1447–1498.CrossRef Maccheroni, F., Marinacci, M., & Rustichini, A. (2006). Ambiguity aversion, robustness and the variational representation of preferences. Econometrica, 74, 1447–1498.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Machina, M. J. (2009). Risk, ambiguity, and the rank-dependence axioms. The American Economic Review, 99(1), 385–392.CrossRef Machina, M. J. (2009). Risk, ambiguity, and the rank-dependence axioms. The American Economic Review, 99(1), 385–392.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Savage, L. J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York: Dover Publications. Savage, L. J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York: Dover Publications.
Zurück zum Zitat Schmeidler, D. (1989). Subjective probability and expected utility without additivity. Econometrica, 57, 571–587.CrossRef Schmeidler, D. (1989). Subjective probability and expected utility without additivity. Econometrica, 57, 571–587.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
The Anscombe–Aumann representation and the independence axiom: a reconsideration
verfasst von
Abhinash Borah
Christopher Kops
Publikationsdatum
01.05.2015
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Theory and Decision / Ausgabe 2/2016
Print ISSN: 0040-5833
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7187
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-015-9498-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2016

Theory and Decision 2/2016 Zur Ausgabe