Pivato, Marcus and Vergopoulos, Vassili (2018): Subjective expected utility with topological constraints.

PDF
MPRA_paper_85749.pdf Download (519kB)  Preview 
Abstract
In many decisions under uncertainty, there are technological constraints on the acts an agent can perform and on the events she can observe. To model this, we assume that the set S of possible states of the world and the set X of possible outcomes each have a topological structure. The only feasible acts are continuous functions from S to X, and the only observable events are regular open subsets of S. We axiomatically characterize Subjective Expected Utility (SEU) representations of conditional preferences over acts, involving a continuous utility function on X (unique up to positive affine transformations), and a unique Borel probability measure on S, along with an auxiliary apparatus called a "liminal structure", which describes the agent’s imperfect perception of events. We also give other SEU representations, which use residual probability charges or compactifications of the state space.
Item Type:  MPRA Paper 

Original Title:  Subjective expected utility with topological constraints 
Language:  English 
Keywords:  Subjective expected utility; topological space; technological feasibility; continuous utility; regular open set; Borel measure 
Subjects:  D  Microeconomics > D8  Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty > D81  Criteria for DecisionMaking under Risk and Uncertainty 
Item ID:  85749 
Depositing User:  Marcus Pivato 
Date Deposited:  11 Apr 2018 07:39 
Last Modified:  11 Apr 2018 07:39 
References:  Aliprantis, C. D., Border, K. C., 2006. Infinite dimensional analysis: A hitchhiker’s guide, 3rd Edition. Springer, Berlin. Alon, S., 2015. Worstcase expected utility. J. Math. Econom. 60, 43–48. Anscombe, F. J., Aumann, R. J., 1963. A definition of subjective probability. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 34, 199–205. CasadesusMasanell, R., Klibanoff, P., Ozdenoren, E., 2000. Maxmin expected utility over Savage acts with a set of priors. Journal of Economic Theory 92 (1), 35–65. Chichilnisky, G., 2000. An axiomatic approach to choice under uncertainty with catastrophic risks. Resource and Energy Economics 22 (3), 221–231. Chichilnisky, G., 2009. The topology of fear. J. Math. Econom. 45 (12), 807–816. Chichilnisky, G., Heal, G., 1997. Social choice with infinite populations: construction of a rule and impos sibility results. Soc. Choice Welf. 14 (2), 303–318. Engelking, R., 1989. General topology. Vol. 6 of Sigma series in pure mathematics. Heldermann Verlag, Berlin. Fremlin, D. H., 2004. Measure theory. Vol. 3: Measure Algebras. Torres Fremlin, Colchester, U.K. Fremlin, D. H., 2008. Measure theory. Vol. 5: Settheoretic Measure Theory. Part I. Torres Fremlin, Colchester. Ghirardato, P., August 2002. Revisiting Savage in a conditional world. Economic Theory 20 (1), 83–92. Gilboa, I., Schmeidler, D., 1994. Additive representations of nonadditive measures and the Choquet integral. Ann. Oper. Res. 52, 43–65, decision theory and decision systems. Givant, S., Halmos, P., 2009. Introduction to Boolean algebras. Undergraduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer, New York. Gollier, C., 2001. The Economics of Risk and Time. MIT Press. Grandmont, 1972. Continuous properties of a von NeumannMorgenstern utility. Journal of Economic Theory 4, 45–57. Hammond, P. J., 1988. Consequentialist foundations for expected utility. Theory and decision 25 (1), 25–78. Jaffray, J.Y., Wakker, P., 1993. Decision making with belief functions: Compatibility and incompatibility with the surething principle. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 7 (3), 255–271. Lipman, B. L., 1999. Decision theory without logical omniscience: toward an axiomatic framework for bounded rationality. Rev. Econom. Stud. 66 (2), 339–361. Mukerji, S., 1997. Understanding the nonadditive probability decision model. Econom. Theory 9 (1), 23–46. Pivato, M., Vergopoulos, V., 2018a. Subjective expected utility with imperfect perception. (preprint). Pivato, M., Vergopoulos, V., 2018b. Contingent plans on topological spaces. Pivato, M., Vergopoulos, V., 2018c. Measure and integration on Boolean algebras of regular open subsets in a topological space. (preprint) Available at http://arxiv.org/abs/1703.02571. Savage, L. J., 1954. The foundations of statistics. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York; Chapman & Hill, Ltd., London. Schmeidler, D., 1989. Subjective probability and expected utility without additivity. Econometrica 57 (3), 571–587. Stinchcombe, M. B., 1997. Countably additive subjective probabilities. Rev. Econom. Stud. 64 (1), 125– 146. von Neumann, J., Morgenstern, O., 1947. Theory of Games and Economic Behaviour, 2nd Edition. Prince ton University Press. Wakker, P., 1985. Continuous expected utility for arbitrary state spaces. In: IX symposium on operations research. Part II. Sections 5–8 (Osnabrück, 1984). Vol. 50 of Methods Oper. Res. Athenäum/Hain/Hanstein, Königstein, pp. 113–129. Wakker, P., 1987. Subjective probabilities for state dependent continuous utility. Mathematical Social Sciences 14 (3), 289–298. Wakker, P., 1988. The algebraic versus the topological approach to additive representations. J. Math. Psych. 32 (4), 421–435. Wakker, P., 1989a. Additive representations of preferences. Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, Dordrecht. Wakker, P., 1989b. Continuous subjective expected utility with nonadditive probabilities. Journal of Math ematical Economics 18 (1), 1–27. Wakker, P., Zank, H., 1999. State dependent expected utility for Savage’s state space. Math. Oper. Res. 24 (1), 8–34. Willard, S., 2004. General topology. Dover Publications, Inc., Mineola, NY. Zhou, L., 1999. Subjective probability theory with continuous acts. J. Math. Econom. 32 (1), 121–130. 
URI:  https://mpra.ub.unimuenchen.de/id/eprint/85749 