# No-Betting Pareto Dominance

Save this PDF as:

Size: px
Start display at page:

## Transcription

1 No-Betting Pareto Dominance Itzhak Gilboa, Larry Samuelson and David Schmeidler HEC Paris/Tel Aviv Yale Interdisciplinary Center Herzlyia/Tel Aviv/Ohio State May, 2014

2 I. Introduction I.1 Trade Suppose Alice and Bob each have Cobb Douglas utility functions for two goods: u A (x 1,x 2 ) = 2 3 lnx lnx 2 u B (x 1,x 2 ) = 1 3 lnx lnx 2 They each have endowment (1/2, 1/2). There is a unique competitive equilibrium of this economy in which Alice consumes ( 2 3, 1 ) ( 3 and Bob consumes 13, 2 ) 3.

3 I.2 Speculation Now suppose there is one good, money. Ann and Bill have identical utility functions, u(x) = ln x. There are two states. Ann and Bill each have half a unit of money in each state. Ann thinks state 1 has probability 2/3, Bill thinks state 1 has probability 1/3. Their expected utility functions are: u A (x 1,x 2 ) = 2 3 lnx lnx 2 u B (x 1,x 2 ) = 1 3 lnx lnx 2 There is a unique competitive equilibrium of this economy in which Alice consumes ( 2 3, 1 ) ( 3 and Bob consumes 13, 2 ) 3.

4 I.3 No-Betting-Pareto Dominance We find the Pareto gains from trade compelling in the first example, where they are based on differences in tastes. We are less convinced by the gains from trade in the second case, which we regard as a pure bet. We offer a No-Betting Pareto relation that refines (i.e., is a subset of) the standard Pareto relation and that excludes betting. The No-Betting Pareto relation allows belief-based trading in which people share risks. Others have worried about Pareto comparisons with different beliefs. The most directly related paper is by Markus Brunnermeier, Alp Simsek and Wei Xiong.

5 II. Foundations Our approach is conservative. We rank no pairs of alternatives that are not already Pareto ranked. We require compelling evidence in order to exclude a Pareto ranking. Our agents are rational, satisfying Savage s axioms. One may distrust Pareto comparisons because people are not rational, but that is not our point here. Utilities and probabilities are different. Utilities are related to desirability, and probabilities to belief.

6 Given this distinction, we must think about how we interpret probabilities. We exclude two extreme cases that render our analysis inapplicable: Probabilities are not objective, or measurable. Otherwise, one would simply measure the appropriate probabilities and use them. Probabilities are not purely subjective. For example, it makes sense to debate what probabilities should be (unlike tastes). Beliefs often differ. We see more trade and more betting than the agreeing-to-disagree and no-trade results would otherwise allow.

7 III. The Model III.1 The Elements Agents N = {1,...,n} A measurable state space (S, Σ) Outcomes X Simple acts: F = f : S X f has finite range and is Σ-measurable. Agent i has i over F represented by maximization of S u i(f(s))dp i.

8 III.2 Definitions Pareto domination: f P g iff for all i N, f i g, and for some k N, f k g For a pair (f,g), interpreted as a change from g to f, agent i is involved in (f,g) if u i (f( )) u i (g( )). N(f,g) N is the set of agents who are involved in the pair (f,g). (f,g) is an improvement, denoted by f g, if N(f,g) and, for all i N(f,g), f i g.

9 III.3 No-Betting-Pareto Given f,g F, we say that f No-Betting Pareto dominates g, denoted f NBP g, if: f improves upon g; There exists a probability measure p 0 such that, for all i N(f,g), S u i(f(s))dp 0 > S u i(g(s))dp 0. Notice that we do not require that the agents agree on the distributions of f, g, only that they can rationalize trade by hypothetical beliefs.

10 III.4 An Example Suppose that f and g are given by the following: State p A p B f g U A U B U A U B Amy and Bruce both prefer f to g. Indeed, Amy prefers f to g iff p A (1) > p A (3) and Bruce prefers f to g iff p B (2) > p B (1). There are beliefs that satisfy both inequalities, for example (.325,.375,.3). Note, however, that no such belief is in the convex hull of Amy and Bruce s beliefs, as both p A and p B agree that state 3 is at least as likely as state 2.

11 III.5 A Special Case: Setting Suppose there are two agents, two states, and an act identifies the amount of money each agent has in each state. Then we can illustrate the No-Betting-Pareto concept in an Edgeworth box.

12 B B A A B B f g f f g A A

13 III.6 A Special Case: Characterization In this special case, an improvement (f, g) satisfies the second condition for No-Betting-Pareto dominance if and only if it moves the agents closer to full insurance.

14 B B g f g f A A

15 Proposition 1 Condition (ii) of No-Betting Pareto is satisfied in the left panel, but not the right panel. Why? On the left, choose p 0 to be the probability according to which f has the same expected value as does g. Both agents would then be indifferent between f and g under p 0, were they risk neutral. Given that they are risk averse, and that g is a (p 0 )-mean-preserving spread of f, both agents strictly prefer f to g under p 0 and hence condition (ii) holds. On the right, assume that condition (ii) were to hold for the two agents with beliefs p 0. Given that these risk-averse agents strictly prefer f to g, despite the fact that f is a spread of g, such strict preferences would certainly hold were the agents risk neutral. However, for no p 0 can the difference f g simultaneously increase the p 0 -expected value for both agents.

16 In this setting, we regard movements away from full insurance as bets. Our criterion thus excludes (only) Pareto improvements that are bets, motivating the name No-Betting Pareto dominance. In more general settings, it is not obvious what constitutes a move toward or away from full insurance, and not obvious what constitutes a bet. Our task is then to identify the appropriate generalizations of the notions that are obvious in the special case.

17 IV. Characterizations IV.1 Combining Agents An alternative (and equivalent, when agents share a common belief) approach to Pareto efficiency is to define efficient allocations as those that maximize the weighted sum of agents utilities. We can establish a similar link for our case of different beliefs.

18 Proposition 2 Consider acts f and g with N(f,g). probability vector p 0 such that, for all i N(f,g), There exists a u i(f(s))dp 0 > u i(g(s))dp 0 S S if and only if, for every distribution over the set of agents involved, denoted by λ (N(f,g)), there exists a state s S, such that i N(f,g) λ(i)u i (f (s)) > i N(f,g) λ(i)u i (g (s)).

19 If the agents want to replace g by f, for each agent there must be at least one state at which the agent is better off under f. The characterization indicates this is also true for every convex combination of agents. The λ-combination can be interpreted as a utilitarian social welfare function, or as an expected utility calculation behind the veil of ignorance.

20 IV.2 Betting X = R N, x = (x 1,...,x n ) X. u i ((x 1,...,x n )) = u i (x i ) u i is differentiable, strictly monotone and (weakly) concave. A pair (f,g) is feasible if i N(f,g) f(s) i i N(f,g) g(s) i for all s. A feasible improvement (f,g) is a bet if g(s) i is independent of s for each i N (f,g).

21 Proposition 3 If (f,g) is a bet, then it cannot be the case that f NBP g. What else is excluded? The previous result shows that No-Betting Pareto excludes the most obvious examples of bets. These are not the only things we would want to exclude, and these are not the only excluded improvements.

22 B B g f g f A A

23 g B f g vector f-g B f g vector α(f-g) A A

24 Proposition 4 The following are equivalent: (i) There does not exist a probability vector p 0 such that, for all i N(f,g), u i(f(s))dp 0 > u i(g(s))dp 0 S S (ii) There exists an alternative d F satisfying i N d(s) i = 0 s S. that also has the following property: for every g F such that g (s) i is independent of s for each i N (f,g) and lies in the interior of R, and for every profile of beliefs (p i ) i such that f g, there exists α > 0 such that (g + αd,g ) is a bet (for the utilities (u i ) i and the beliefs (p i ) i ).

25 An implication is that we can exploit the agents. If they strictly prefer a zero-sum exchange, then we can construct a negative-sum exchange that they also strictly prefer. It initially seems trivial to conclude that we can exploit agents with different beliefs. The key to the result is that we can design a single such bet that works for all beliefs and all initial full-insurance allocations. Future work 1: Are there other characterizations of betting? Is this the most useful?

26 IV.3 Transitivity Proposition 5 The relation NBP is acyclic but it need not be transitive. For example, let p 1 = (1,0), p 2 = (0,1) and Then in the following, f NBP h NBP g, but not f NBP g.

27 g : State 1 State 2 Agent Agent h : State 1 State 2 Agent Agent f : State 1 State 2 Agent Agent

28 However, Define f fnbp g if (f,g) is feasible and f NBP g, then If (f,g) is a bet, then it cannot be the case that f t fnbp g.

29 IV.4 Incompleteness Future work 2: The No-Betting Pareto relation is a refinement of the Pareto relation, and so is less complete than the Pareto relation. How can such an incomplete relation be useful? We can imagine settings in which agents must demonstrate that f NBP g in order to make the trade. The No-Betting Pareto relation does not require than analyst to know agents beliefs, only that they are willing to trade. We consider this an advantage. The No-Betting Pareto relation does require the analyst know the state space.

30 V. Future Work 3: Ambiguity V.1 The Setting Suppose that each agent has a set of priors and maximizes the minimum (over this set of priors) expected utility. We similarly adjust our no-betting Pareto criterion, saying that f NBP g if f is an improvement of g and there is a single set of priors with respect to which every involved agent finds f better than g. Suppose f is an improvement of g. Then any trade that can be justified with a single prior p 0 can be justified with a set of priors, namely {p 0 }. Does the set-valued approach allows us to justify anything else?

31 V.2 Betting Let (f,g) be a bet. Then it cannot be that f NBP g under ambiguity. Because (f,g) is a bet, we know that for any single probability, there is some agent who prefers g to f. But then given any set of probabilities, there must always be an agent who prefers g to f when the latter is evaluated according to the worst probability.

32 V.3 Other Trades There may exist (f,g) for which it is impossible that f NBP g in the absence of ambiguity, but f NBP g under ambiguity. For example: s 1 s 2 f.4,.4.4,.4 g 1,0 0,1 Then we can have f NBP g under ambiguity, but not risk. This appears to open up a prospect for risk-sharing that we would like to allow.

33 Another example: s 1 s 2 s 3 s 4 f 2,1 1, 2 0, 1 1,0 g 1, 1 1,1 0, 1 1,0. Again, we can have f NBP g under ambiguity, but not risk. Here, however, in moving from g to f, the agents have essentially reversed the roles of states s 1 and s 2, while paying one unit in the process.

34 VI. Discussion

### NO-BETTING-PARETO DOMINANCE. LARRY SAMUELSON Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, U.S.A.

http://www.econometricsociety.org/ Econometrica, Vol. 82, No. 4 (July, 2014), 1405 1442 NO-BETTING-PARETO DOMINANCE ITZHAK GILBOA HEC Paris, 78351 Jouy-en-Josas Cedex, France and Berglas School of Economics,

### A Welfare Criterion for Models with Distorted Beliefs

A Welfare Criterion for Models with Distorted Beliefs Markus Brunnermeier, Alp Simsek, Wei Xiong August 2012 Markus Brunnermeier, Alp Simsek, Wei Xiong () Welfare Criterion for Distorted Beliefs August

### Unraveling versus Unraveling: A Memo on Competitive Equilibriums and Trade in Insurance Markets

Unraveling versus Unraveling: A Memo on Competitive Equilibriums and Trade in Insurance Markets Nathaniel Hendren January, 2014 Abstract Both Akerlof (1970) and Rothschild and Stiglitz (1976) show that

### WEAK DOMINANCE: A MYSTERY CRACKED

WEAK DOMINANCE: A MYSTERY CRACKED JOHN HILLAS AND DOV SAMET Abstract. What strategy profiles can be played when it is common knowledge that weakly dominated strategies are not played? A comparison to the

### Choice under Uncertainty

Choice under Uncertainty Part 1: Expected Utility Function, Attitudes towards Risk, Demand for Insurance Slide 1 Choice under Uncertainty We ll analyze the underlying assumptions of expected utility theory

### Lecture 15. Ranking Payoff Distributions: Stochastic Dominance. First-Order Stochastic Dominance: higher distribution

Lecture 15 Ranking Payoff Distributions: Stochastic Dominance First-Order Stochastic Dominance: higher distribution Definition 6.D.1: The distribution F( ) first-order stochastically dominates G( ) if

### Insurance. Michael Peters. December 27, 2013

Insurance Michael Peters December 27, 2013 1 Introduction In this chapter, we study a very simple model of insurance using the ideas and concepts developed in the chapter on risk aversion. You may recall

### Name. Final Exam, Economics 210A, December 2011 Here are some remarks to help you with answering the questions.

Name Final Exam, Economics 210A, December 2011 Here are some remarks to help you with answering the questions. Question 1. A firm has a production function F (x 1, x 2 ) = ( x 1 + x 2 ) 2. It is a price

### Moral Hazard. Itay Goldstein. Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania

Moral Hazard Itay Goldstein Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania 1 Principal-Agent Problem Basic problem in corporate finance: separation of ownership and control: o The owners of the firm are typically

### Challenges to a Policy Treatment of Speculative Trading Motivated by Differences in Beliefs

Challenges to a Policy Treatment of Speculative Trading Motivated by Differences in Beliefs Darrell Duffie ABSTRACT This paper discusses some of the challenges faced by a policy treatment of speculative

### Regret and Rejoicing Effects on Mixed Insurance *

Regret and Rejoicing Effects on Mixed Insurance * Yoichiro Fujii, Osaka Sangyo University Mahito Okura, Doshisha Women s College of Liberal Arts Yusuke Osaki, Osaka Sangyo University + Abstract This papers

### Gains from Trade. Christopher P. Chambers and Takashi Hayashi. March 25, 2013. Abstract

Gains from Trade Christopher P. Chambers Takashi Hayashi March 25, 2013 Abstract In a market design context, we ask whether there exists a system of transfers regulations whereby gains from trade can always

### Decentralization and Private Information with Mutual Organizations

Decentralization and Private Information with Mutual Organizations Edward C. Prescott and Adam Blandin Arizona State University 09 April 2014 1 Motivation Invisible hand works in standard environments

### ALMOST COMMON PRIORS 1. INTRODUCTION

ALMOST COMMON PRIORS ZIV HELLMAN ABSTRACT. What happens when priors are not common? We introduce a measure for how far a type space is from having a common prior, which we term prior distance. If a type

### Revealed Preference. Ichiro Obara. October 8, 2012 UCLA. Obara (UCLA) Revealed Preference October 8, / 17

Ichiro Obara UCLA October 8, 2012 Obara (UCLA) October 8, 2012 1 / 17 Obara (UCLA) October 8, 2012 2 / 17 Suppose that we obtained data of price and consumption pairs D = { (p t, x t ) R L ++ R L +, t

### Working Paper Series

RGEA Universidade de Vigo http://webs.uvigo.es/rgea Working Paper Series A Market Game Approach to Differential Information Economies Guadalupe Fugarolas, Carlos Hervés-Beloso, Emma Moreno- García and

### Chapter 25: Exchange in Insurance Markets

Chapter 25: Exchange in Insurance Markets 25.1: Introduction In this chapter we use the techniques that we have been developing in the previous 2 chapters to discuss the trade of risk. Insurance markets

### Imprecise probabilities, bets and functional analytic methods in Łukasiewicz logic.

Imprecise probabilities, bets and functional analytic methods in Łukasiewicz logic. Martina Fedel joint work with K.Keimel,F.Montagna,W.Roth Martina Fedel (UNISI) 1 / 32 Goal The goal of this talk is to

### Institute for Empirical Research in Economics University of Zurich. Working Paper Series ISSN 1424-0459. Working Paper No. 229

Institute for Empirical Research in Economics University of Zurich Working Paper Series ISSN 1424-0459 Working Paper No. 229 On the Notion of the First Best in Standard Hidden Action Problems Christian

### First Welfare Theorem

First Welfare Theorem Econ 2100 Fall 2015 Lecture 17, November 2 Outline 1 First Welfare Theorem 2 Preliminaries to Second Welfare Theorem Last Class Definitions A feasible allocation (x, y) is Pareto

### Problem Set I: Preferences, W.A.R.P., consumer choice

Problem Set I: Preferences, W.A.R.P., consumer choice Paolo Crosetto paolo.crosetto@unimi.it Exercises solved in class on 18th January 2009 Recap:,, Definition 1. The strict preference relation is x y

### Lecture 11 Uncertainty

Lecture 11 Uncertainty 1. Contingent Claims and the State-Preference Model 1) Contingent Commodities and Contingent Claims Using the simple two-good model we have developed throughout this course, think

### The Role of Dispute Settlement Procedures in International Trade Agreements: Online Appendix

The Role of Dispute Settlement Procedures in International Trade Agreements: Online Appendix Giovanni Maggi Yale University, NBER and CEPR Robert W. Staiger Stanford University and NBER November 2010 1.

### THE UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS WORKING PAPERS SERIES IN THEORETICAL AND APPLIED ECONOMICS STRATEGY-PROOF RISK SHARING

THE UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS WORKING PAPERS SERIES IN THEORETICAL AND APPLIED ECONOMICS STRATEGY-PROOF RISK SHARING Biung-Ghi Ju University of Kansas, Department of Economics April, 2003 THE UNIVERSITY OF

### General Equilibrium Theory: Examples

General Equilibrium Theory: Examples 3 examples of GE: pure exchange (Edgeworth box) 1 producer - 1 consumer several producers and an example illustrating the limits of the partial equilibrium approach

### Economics of Insurance

Economics of Insurance In this last lecture, we cover most topics of Economics of Information within a single application. Through this, you will see how the differential informational assumptions allow

### Economics 200B Part 1 UCSD Winter 2015 Prof. R. Starr, Mr. John Rehbeck Final Exam 1

Economics 200B Part 1 UCSD Winter 2015 Prof. R. Starr, Mr. John Rehbeck Final Exam 1 Your Name: SUGGESTED ANSWERS Please answer all questions. Each of the six questions marked with a big number counts

### Red Herrings: Some Thoughts on the Meaning of Zero-Probability Events and Mathematical Modeling. Edi Karni*

Red Herrings: Some Thoughts on the Meaning of Zero-Probability Events and Mathematical Modeling By Edi Karni* Abstract: Kicking off the discussion following Savage's presentation at the 1952 Paris colloquium,

### Midterm March 2015. (a) Consumer i s budget constraint is. c i 0 12 + b i c i H 12 (1 + r)b i c i L 12 (1 + r)b i ;

Masters in Economics-UC3M Microeconomics II Midterm March 015 Exercise 1. In an economy that extends over two periods, today and tomorrow, there are two consumers, A and B; and a single perishable good,

### 2. Information Economics

2. Information Economics In General Equilibrium Theory all agents had full information regarding any variable of interest (prices, commodities, state of nature, cost function, preferences, etc.) In many

### 6.254 : Game Theory with Engineering Applications Lecture 2: Strategic Form Games

6.254 : Game Theory with Engineering Applications Lecture 2: Strategic Form Games Asu Ozdaglar MIT February 4, 2009 1 Introduction Outline Decisions, utility maximization Strategic form games Best responses

### The Cumulative Distribution and Stochastic Dominance

The Cumulative Distribution and Stochastic Dominance L A T E X file: StochasticDominance Daniel A. Graham, September 1, 2011 A decision problem under uncertainty is frequently cast as the problem of choosing

### Chapter 7. Sealed-bid Auctions

Chapter 7 Sealed-bid Auctions An auction is a procedure used for selling and buying items by offering them up for bid. Auctions are often used to sell objects that have a variable price (for example oil)

### 1 Uncertainty and Preferences

In this chapter, we present the theory of consumer preferences on risky outcomes. The theory is then applied to study the demand for insurance. Consider the following story. John wants to mail a package

### Lecture notes on Moral Hazard, i.e. the Hidden Action Principle-Agent Model

Lecture notes on Moral Hazard, i.e. the Hidden Action Principle-Agent Model Allan Collard-Wexler April 19, 2012 Co-Written with John Asker and Vasiliki Skreta 1 Reading for next week: Make Versus Buy in

### Notes V General Equilibrium: Positive Theory. 1 Walrasian Equilibrium and Excess Demand

Notes V General Equilibrium: Positive Theory In this lecture we go on considering a general equilibrium model of a private ownership economy. In contrast to the Notes IV, we focus on positive issues such

### Decision & Risk Analysis Lecture 6. Risk and Utility

Risk and Utility Risk - Introduction Payoff Game 1 \$14.50 0.5 0.5 \$30 - \$1 EMV 30*0.5+(-1)*0.5= 14.5 Game 2 Which game will you play? Which game is risky? \$50.00 Figure 13.1 0.5 0.5 \$2,000 - \$1,900 EMV

### Online Appendix Feedback Effects, Asymmetric Trading, and the Limits to Arbitrage

Online Appendix Feedback Effects, Asymmetric Trading, and the Limits to Arbitrage Alex Edmans LBS, NBER, CEPR, and ECGI Itay Goldstein Wharton Wei Jiang Columbia May 8, 05 A Proofs of Propositions and

### On the Existence of Nash Equilibrium in General Imperfectly Competitive Insurance Markets with Asymmetric Information

analysing existence in general insurance environments that go beyond the canonical insurance paradigm. More recently, theoretical and empirical work has attempted to identify selection in insurance markets

### THE FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF ARBITRAGE PRICING

THE FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF ARBITRAGE PRICING 1. Introduction The Black-Scholes theory, which is the main subject of this course and its sequel, is based on the Efficient Market Hypothesis, that arbitrages

### THE ROOMMATES PROBLEM DISCUSSED

THE ROOMMATES PROBLEM DISCUSSED NATHAN SCHULZ Abstract. The stable roommates problem as originally posed by Gale and Shapley [1] in 1962 involves a single set of even cardinality 2n, each member of which

### Non-Exclusive Competition in the Market for Lemons

Non-Exclusive Competition in the Market for Lemons Andrea Attar Thomas Mariotti François Salanié October 2007 Abstract In order to check the impact of the exclusivity regime on equilibrium allocations,

### Economics 1011a: Intermediate Microeconomics

Lecture 12: More Uncertainty Economics 1011a: Intermediate Microeconomics Lecture 12: More on Uncertainty Thursday, October 23, 2008 Last class we introduced choice under uncertainty. Today we will explore

### ECON 301: General Equilibrium I (Exchange) 1. Intermediate Microeconomics II, ECON 301. General Equilibrium I: Exchange

ECON 301: General Equilibrium I (Exchange) 1 Intermediate Microeconomics II, ECON 301 General Equilibrium I: Exchange The equilibrium concepts you have used till now in your Introduction to Economics,

### UCLA. Department of Economics Ph. D. Preliminary Exam Micro-Economic Theory

UCLA Department of Economics Ph. D. Preliminary Exam Micro-Economic Theory (SPRING 2011) Instructions: You have 4 hours for the exam Answer any 5 out of the 6 questions. All questions are weighted equally.

### Introduction. Agents have preferences over the two goods which are determined by a utility function. Speci cally, type 1 agents utility is given by

Introduction General equilibrium analysis looks at how multiple markets come into equilibrium simultaneously. With many markets, equilibrium analysis must take explicit account of the fact that changes

### Introduction to Game Theory IIIii. Payoffs: Probability and Expected Utility

Introduction to Game Theory IIIii Payoffs: Probability and Expected Utility Lecture Summary 1. Introduction 2. Probability Theory 3. Expected Values and Expected Utility. 1. Introduction We continue further

### FINAL EXAM, Econ 171, March, 2015, with answers

FINAL EXAM, Econ 171, March, 2015, with answers There are 9 questions. Answer any 8 of them. Good luck! Problem 1. (True or False) If a player has a dominant strategy in a simultaneous-move game, then

### Convex analysis and profit/cost/support functions

CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences Convex analysis and profit/cost/support functions KC Border October 2004 Revised January 2009 Let A be a subset of R m

### Tastes and Indifference Curves

C H A P T E R 4 Tastes and Indifference Curves This chapter begins a 2-chapter treatment of tastes or what we also call preferences. In the first of these chapters, we simply investigate the basic logic

### Microeconomic Theory Jamison / Kohlberg / Avery Problem Set 4 Solutions Spring 2012. (a) LEFT CENTER RIGHT TOP 8, 5 0, 0 6, 3 BOTTOM 0, 0 7, 6 6, 3

Microeconomic Theory Jamison / Kohlberg / Avery Problem Set 4 Solutions Spring 2012 1. Subgame Perfect Equilibrium and Dominance (a) LEFT CENTER RIGHT TOP 8, 5 0, 0 6, 3 BOTTOM 0, 0 7, 6 6, 3 Highlighting

### Chapter 21: The Discounted Utility Model

Chapter 21: The Discounted Utility Model 21.1: Introduction This is an important chapter in that it introduces, and explores the implications of, an empirically relevant utility function representing intertemporal

### A Simple Model of Price Dispersion *

Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas Globalization and Monetary Policy Institute Working Paper No. 112 http://www.dallasfed.org/assets/documents/institute/wpapers/2012/0112.pdf A Simple Model of Price Dispersion

### Labor Economics, 14.661. Lecture 3: Education, Selection, and Signaling

Labor Economics, 14.661. Lecture 3: Education, Selection, and Signaling Daron Acemoglu MIT November 3, 2011. Daron Acemoglu (MIT) Education, Selection, and Signaling November 3, 2011. 1 / 31 Introduction

### Online Appendix. A2 : Description of New York City High School Admissions

Online Appendix This appendix provides supplementary material for Strategy-proofness versus Efficiency in Matching with Indifferences: Redesigning the NYC High School Match. The numbering of sections parallels

### 1 Portfolio mean and variance

Copyright c 2005 by Karl Sigman Portfolio mean and variance Here we study the performance of a one-period investment X 0 > 0 (dollars) shared among several different assets. Our criterion for measuring

### UC Berkeley Haas School of Business Economic Analysis for Business Decisions (EWMBA 201A)

UC Berkeley Haas School of Business Economic Analysis for Business Decisions (EWMBA 201A) The economic agent (PR 3.1-3.4) Standard economics vs. behavioral economics Lectures 1-2 Aug. 15, 2009 Prologue

### A public good is often defined to be a good that is both nonrivalrous and nonexcludable in consumption.

Theory of Public Goods A public good is often defined to be a good that is both nonrivalrous and nonexcludable in consumption. The nonrivalrous property holds when use of a unit of the good by one consumer

### Sharing Online Advertising Revenue with Consumers

Sharing Online Advertising Revenue with Consumers Yiling Chen 2,, Arpita Ghosh 1, Preston McAfee 1, and David Pennock 1 1 Yahoo! Research. Email: arpita, mcafee, pennockd@yahoo-inc.com 2 Harvard University.

### Sharing Online Advertising Revenue with Consumers

Sharing Online Advertising Revenue with Consumers Yiling Chen 2,, Arpita Ghosh 1, Preston McAfee 1, and David Pennock 1 1 Yahoo! Research. Email: arpita, mcafee, pennockd@yahoo-inc.com 2 Harvard University.

### Aggregating Tastes, Beliefs, and Attitudes under Uncertainty

Aggregating Tastes, Beliefs, and Attitudes under Uncertainty Eric Danan Thibault Gajdos Brian Hill Jean-Marc Tallon July 20, 2014 Abstract We provide possibility results on the aggregation of beliefs and

### Strengthening International Courts and the Early Settlement of Disputes

Strengthening International Courts and the Early Settlement of Disputes Michael Gilligan, Leslie Johns, and B. Peter Rosendorff November 18, 2008 Technical Appendix Definitions σ(ŝ) {π [0, 1] s(π) = ŝ}

### Adverse Selection and the Market for Health Insurance in the U.S. James Marton

Preliminary and Incomplete Please do not Quote Adverse Selection and the Market for Health Insurance in the U.S. James Marton Washington University, Department of Economics Date: 4/24/01 Abstract Several

### Lecture 3: Growth with Overlapping Generations (Acemoglu 2009, Chapter 9, adapted from Zilibotti)

Lecture 3: Growth with Overlapping Generations (Acemoglu 2009, Chapter 9, adapted from Zilibotti) Kjetil Storesletten September 10, 2013 Kjetil Storesletten () Lecture 3 September 10, 2013 1 / 44 Growth

### Lecture 13: Risk Aversion and Expected Utility

Lecture 13: Risk Aversion and Expected Utility Uncertainty over monetary outcomes Let x denote a monetary outcome. C is a subset of the real line, i.e. [a, b]. A lottery L is a cumulative distribution

Review for Exam 2 Instructions: Please read carefully The exam will have 25 multiple choice questions and 5 work problems You are not responsible for any topics that are not covered in the lecture note

### Research Article Stability Analysis for Higher-Order Adjacent Derivative in Parametrized Vector Optimization

Hindawi Publishing Corporation Journal of Inequalities and Applications Volume 2010, Article ID 510838, 15 pages doi:10.1155/2010/510838 Research Article Stability Analysis for Higher-Order Adjacent Derivative

### TOPIC 4: DERIVATIVES

TOPIC 4: DERIVATIVES 1. The derivative of a function. Differentiation rules 1.1. The slope of a curve. The slope of a curve at a point P is a measure of the steepness of the curve. If Q is a point on the

### Lecture V: Mixed Strategies

Lecture V: Mixed Strategies Markus M. Möbius February 26, 2008 Osborne, chapter 4 Gibbons, sections 1.3-1.3.A 1 The Advantage of Mixed Strategies Consider the following Rock-Paper-Scissors game: Note that

### Arbitrage and asset market equilibrium in infinite dimensional economies with risk-averse expected utilities

Arbitrage and asset market equilibrium in infinite dimensional economies with risk-averse expected utilities Thai Ha-Huy, Cuong Le Van and Manh-Hung Nguyen April 22, 2013 Abstract We consider a model with

### Investigación Operativa. The uniform rule in the division problem

Boletín de Estadística e Investigación Operativa Vol. 27, No. 2, Junio 2011, pp. 102-112 Investigación Operativa The uniform rule in the division problem Gustavo Bergantiños Cid Dept. de Estadística e

### Ambiguity and Insurance

Ambiguity and Insurance Gharad Bryan 1 [Job Market Paper] November 14, 2010 1 Yale University Department of Economics. I am indebted to Dean Karlan, Chris Udry, Mushfiq Mobarak and Ben Polak for support

### Walrasian Demand. u(x) where B(p, w) = {x R n + : p x w}.

Walrasian Demand Econ 2100 Fall 2015 Lecture 5, September 16 Outline 1 Walrasian Demand 2 Properties of Walrasian Demand 3 An Optimization Recipe 4 First and Second Order Conditions Definition Walrasian

### 2.3 Convex Constrained Optimization Problems

42 CHAPTER 2. FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS IN CONVEX OPTIMIZATION Theorem 15 Let f : R n R and h : R R. Consider g(x) = h(f(x)) for all x R n. The function g is convex if either of the following two conditions

### A Dynamic Mechanism and Surplus Extraction Under Ambiguity 1 Subir Bose University of Leicester, Leicester, UK

A Dynamic Mechanism and Surplus Extraction Under Ambiguity 1 Subir Bose University of Leicester, Leicester, UK Arup Daripa Birkbeck College, London University Bloomsbury, London, UK Final Revision: January

### Lecture 8 The Subjective Theory of Betting on Theories

Lecture 8 The Subjective Theory of Betting on Theories Patrick Maher Philosophy 517 Spring 2007 Introduction The subjective theory of probability holds that the laws of probability are laws that rational

INEFFICIENT TRADE PATTERNS: EXCESSIVE TRADE, CROSS-HAULING AND DUMPING Benjamin Eden 1 Vanderbilt University and The University of Haifa February 2005 Mailing address: Economics, VU station B #351819 2301

### 0.0.2 Pareto Efficiency (Sec. 4, Ch. 1 of text)

September 2 Exercises: Problem 2 (p. 21) Efficiency: p. 28-29: 1, 4, 5, 6 0.0.2 Pareto Efficiency (Sec. 4, Ch. 1 of text) We discuss here a notion of efficiency that is rooted in the individual preferences

### UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA

WORKING PAPERS Egbert Dierker Hildegard Dierker Birgit Grodal Nonexistence of Constrained Efficient Equilibria when Markets are Incomplete August 2001 Working Paper No: 0111 DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY

### A Simpli ed Axiomatic Approach to Ambiguity Aversion

A Simpli ed Axiomatic Approach to Ambiguity Aversion William S. Neilson Department of Economics University of Tennessee Knoxville, TN 37996-0550 wneilson@utk.edu May 2010 Abstract This paper takes the

### A Simpli ed Axiomatic Approach to Ambiguity Aversion

A Simpli ed Axiomatic Approach to Ambiguity Aversion William S. Neilson Department of Economics University of Tennessee Knoxville, TN 37996-0550 wneilson@utk.edu March 2009 Abstract This paper takes the

### The Expectation Maximization Algorithm A short tutorial

The Expectation Maximiation Algorithm A short tutorial Sean Borman Comments and corrections to: em-tut at seanborman dot com July 8 2004 Last updated January 09, 2009 Revision history 2009-0-09 Corrected

Mechanisms for Fair Attribution Eric Balkanski Yaron Singer Abstract We propose a new framework for optimization under fairness constraints. The problems we consider model procurement where the goal is

### Critical points of once continuously differentiable functions are important because they are the only points that can be local maxima or minima.

Lecture 0: Convexity and Optimization We say that if f is a once continuously differentiable function on an interval I, and x is a point in the interior of I that x is a critical point of f if f (x) =

### INCOMPLETE CONTRACTS AND COMPLEXITY COSTS

LUCA ANDERLINI and LEONARDO FELLI INCOMPLETE CONTRACTS AND COMPLEXITY COSTS ABSTRACT. This paper investigates, in a simple risk-sharing framework, the extent to which the incompleteness of contracts could

### Jeux finiment répétés avec signaux semi-standards

Jeux finiment répétés avec signaux semi-standards P. Contou-Carrère 1, T. Tomala 2 CEPN-LAGA, Université Paris 13 7 décembre 2010 1 Université Paris 1, Panthéon Sorbonne 2 HEC, Paris Introduction Repeated

### Economics Discussion Paper Series EDP-1005. Agreeing to spin the subjective roulette wheel: Bargaining with subjective mixtures

Economics Discussion Paper Series EDP-1005 Agreeing to spin the subjective roulette wheel: Bargaining with subjective mixtures Craig Webb March 2010 Economics School of Social Sciences The University of

### Certainty Equivalent in Capital Markets

Certainty Equivalent in Capital Markets Lutz Kruschwitz Freie Universität Berlin and Andreas Löffler 1 Universität Hannover version from January 23, 2003 1 Corresponding author, Königsworther Platz 1,

### At t = 0, a generic intermediary j solves the optimization problem:

Internet Appendix for A Model of hadow Banking * At t = 0, a generic intermediary j solves the optimization problem: max ( D, I H, I L, H, L, TH, TL ) [R (I H + T H H ) + p H ( H T H )] + [E ω (π ω ) A

### Existence of Sunspot Equilibria and Uniqueness of Spot Market Equilibria: The Case of Intrinsically Complete Markets

Existence of Sunspot Equilibria and Uniqueness of Spot Market Equilibria: The Case of Intrinsically Complete Markets Thorsten Hens 1, Janós Mayer 2 and Beate Pilgrim 3 1 IEW, Department of Economics, University

### Prices versus Exams as Strategic Instruments for Competing Universities

Prices versus Exams as Strategic Instruments for Competing Universities Elena Del Rey and Laura Romero October 004 Abstract In this paper we investigate the optimal choice of prices and/or exams by universities

### Iterated Dynamic Belief Revision. Sonja Smets, University of Groningen. website: http://www.vub.ac.be/clwf/ss

LSE-Groningen Workshop I 1 Iterated Dynamic Belief Revision Sonja Smets, University of Groningen website: http://www.vub.ac.be/clwf/ss Joint work with Alexandru Baltag, COMLAB, Oxford University LSE-Groningen

### Asset Pricing. Chapter IV. Measuring Risk and Risk Aversion. June 20, 2006

Chapter IV. Measuring Risk and Risk Aversion June 20, 2006 Measuring Risk Aversion Utility function Indifference Curves U(Y) tangent lines U(Y + h) U[0.5(Y + h) + 0.5(Y h)] 0.5U(Y + h) + 0.5U(Y h) U(Y

### Alok Gupta. Dmitry Zhdanov

RESEARCH ARTICLE GROWTH AND SUSTAINABILITY OF MANAGED SECURITY SERVICES NETWORKS: AN ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVE Alok Gupta Department of Information and Decision Sciences, Carlson School of Management, University

### The Effect of Ambiguity Aversion on Insurance and Self-protection

The Effect of Ambiguity Aversion on Insurance and Self-protection David Alary Toulouse School of Economics (LERNA) Christian Gollier Toulouse School of Economics (LERNA and IDEI) Nicolas Treich Toulouse

### On the Investment Implications of Bankruptcy. Sabancı University

On the Investment Implications of Bankruptcy Laws Özgür KIBRIS and Arzu KIBRIS Sabancı University A firm goes banktrupt Introduction: Bankruptcy Problem Liquidated assets worth E \$ The bankrupt firm owes

### Chapter 6: Pure Exchange

Chapter 6: Pure Exchange Pure Exchange Pareto-Efficient Allocation Competitive Price System Equitable Endowments Fair Social Welfare Allocation Outline and Conceptual Inquiries There are Gains from Trade