How To Understand The Theory Of The Power Function In Economics

Similar documents
Economics 326: Duality and the Slutsky Decomposition. Ethan Kaplan

c 2008 Je rey A. Miron We have described the constraints that a consumer faces, i.e., discussed the budget constraint.

Advanced Microeconomics

TOPIC 4: DERIVATIVES

Practice with Proofs

Common sense, and the model that we have used, suggest that an increase in p means a decrease in demand, but this is not the only possibility.

Lecture Notes 10

36 CHAPTER 1. LIMITS AND CONTINUITY. Figure 1.17: At which points is f not continuous?

Representation of functions as power series

Economic Principles Solutions to Problem Set 1

Economics 121b: Intermediate Microeconomics Problem Set 2 1/20/10

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

1 if 1 x 0 1 if 0 x 1

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

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

Lecture 5 Principal Minors and the Hessian

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 6.436J/15.085J Fall 2008 Lecture 5 9/17/2008 RANDOM VARIABLES

Definition and Properties of the Production Function: Lecture

Linear Programming Notes V Problem Transformations

Multi-variable Calculus and Optimization

160 CHAPTER 4. VECTOR SPACES

CAPM, Arbitrage, and Linear Factor Models

How To Solve A Minimum Set Covering Problem (Mcp)

1.2 Solving a System of Linear Equations

1 Maximizing pro ts when marginal costs are increasing

DIFFERENTIABILITY OF COMPLEX FUNCTIONS. Contents

Exact Nonparametric Tests for Comparing Means - A Personal Summary

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

Some other convex-valued selection theorems 147 (2) Every lower semicontinuous mapping F : X! IR such that for every x 2 X, F (x) is either convex and

Alternative proof for claim in [1]

A Simpli ed Axiomatic Approach to Ambiguity Aversion

Lecture Notes on Elasticity of Substitution

Partial f (x; y) x f (x; x2 y2 and then we evaluate the derivative as if y is a constant.

U.C. Berkeley CS276: Cryptography Handout 0.1 Luca Trevisan January, Notes on Algebra

DERIVATIVES AS MATRICES; CHAIN RULE

Choice under Uncertainty

Pricing Cloud Computing: Inelasticity and Demand Discovery

Adaptive Online Gradient Descent

3. Mathematical Induction

Cost Minimization and the Cost Function

Increasing for all. Convex for all. ( ) Increasing for all (remember that the log function is only defined for ). ( ) Concave for all.

Homework # 3 Solutions

Lecture 2: August 29. Linear Programming (part I)

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

5.1 Derivatives and Graphs

SHARP BOUNDS FOR THE SUM OF THE SQUARES OF THE DEGREES OF A GRAPH

Chapter 4 Online Appendix: The Mathematics of Utility Functions

The Binomial Distribution

Convex analysis and profit/cost/support functions

Stochastic Inventory Control

Optimal insurance contracts with adverse selection and comonotonic background risk

IDENTIFICATION IN A CLASS OF NONPARAMETRIC SIMULTANEOUS EQUATIONS MODELS. Steven T. Berry and Philip A. Haile. March 2011 Revised April 2011

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

Utility. M. Utku Ünver Micro Theory. M. Utku Ünver Micro Theory Utility 1 / 15

0 0 such that f x L whenever x a

Follow links for Class Use and other Permissions. For more information send to:

6.4 Logarithmic Equations and Inequalities

Elements of probability theory

24. The Branch and Bound Method

Chapter 4. Polynomial and Rational Functions. 4.1 Polynomial Functions and Their Graphs

Preferences. M. Utku Ünver Micro Theory. Boston College. M. Utku Ünver Micro Theory (BC) Preferences 1 / 20

6.207/14.15: Networks Lecture 15: Repeated Games and Cooperation

CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING Consumer Behavior. Philip A. Viton. March 4, Introduction 2

Mathematical finance and linear programming (optimization)

1 Sufficient statistics

The Graphical Method: An Example

Maximum Likelihood Estimation

Tiers, Preference Similarity, and the Limits on Stable Partners

The fundamental question in economics is 2. Consumer Preferences

NOTES ON LINEAR TRANSFORMATIONS

What is Linear Programming?

1 Solving LPs: The Simplex Algorithm of George Dantzig

1.7 Graphs of Functions

Sensitivity Analysis 3.1 AN EXAMPLE FOR ANALYSIS

Separation Properties for Locally Convex Cones

Partial Fractions Decomposition

Online Appendix to Stochastic Imitative Game Dynamics with Committed Agents

Integer factorization is in P

Math 4310 Handout - Quotient Vector Spaces

1 Norms and Vector Spaces

Working Paper Series

On Lexicographic (Dictionary) Preference

Inner Product Spaces

EconS Advanced Microeconomics II Handout on Cheap Talk

Constrained Optimisation

IEOR 6711: Stochastic Models I Fall 2012, Professor Whitt, Tuesday, September 11 Normal Approximations and the Central Limit Theorem

THE BANACH CONTRACTION PRINCIPLE. Contents

SECOND DERIVATIVE TEST FOR CONSTRAINED EXTREMA

Voluntary Voting: Costs and Bene ts

LEARNING OBJECTIVES FOR THIS CHAPTER

6.3 Conditional Probability and Independence

Chapter 21: The Discounted Utility Model

3 Contour integrals and Cauchy s Theorem

2.3 Convex Constrained Optimization Problems

Portfolio selection based on upper and lower exponential possibility distributions

Market Power, Forward Trading and Supply Function. Competition

Notes on Symmetric Matrices

Comments on Quotient Spaces and Quotient Maps

On characterization of a class of convex operators for pricing insurance risks

MATH 4330/5330, Fourier Analysis Section 11, The Discrete Fourier Transform

Transcription:

Natalia Lazzati Mathematics for Economics (Part I) Note 1: Quasiconcave and Pseudoconcave Functions Note 1 is based on Madden (1986, Ch. 13, 14) and Simon and Blume (1994, Ch. 21). Monotonic transformations: Cardinal Versus Ordinal Utility A utility function could be said to measure the level of satisfaction associated to each commodity bundle. Nowadays, no economist really believes that a real number can be assigned to each commodity bundle which expresses (in utils?) the consumer s level of satisfaction with this bundle. Economists believe that consumers have well-behaved preferences over bundles and that, given any two bundles, a consumer can indicate a preference of one over the other or the indi erence between the two. Although economists work with utility functions, they are concerned with the level sets of such functions, not with the number that the utility function assigns to any given level set. In consumer theory these level sets are called indi erence curves. A property of utility functions is called ordinal if it depends only on the shape and location of a consumer s indi erence curves. It is alternatively called cardinal if it also depends on the actual amount of utility the utility function assigns to each indi erence set. In the modern approach, we say that two utility functions are equivalent if they have the same indi erence sets, although they may assign di erent numbers to each level set. For instance, let u : R 2 +! R where u (x) = x 1 x 2 be a utility function, and let v : R 2 +! R be the utility function v (x) = u (x) + 1: These two utility functions represent the same preferences and are therefore equivalent. Here v is just a monotonic transformation of u: De nition 1. (Monotonic transformation) Let I be an interval of the real line. Then g : I! R is a monotonic transformation of I if g is a strictly increasing function on I: Furthermore, if g is a monotonic transformation and u is a real-valued function of n variables, then we say that g (u) : x! g [u (x)] is a monotonic transformation of u. 1

If g is di erentiable, then it is a monotonic transformation if g (x) > for all x 2 I: (Show that the functions 3z + 2; z 4 and ln z are monotonic transformations of R ++ :) We next de ne ordinal properties in a precise way. De nition 2. (Ordinal property) A characteristic of a function is called ordinal if every monotonic transformation of a function with this characteristic still has this characteristic. The next example sheds light on this concept. Example 1. Let u : R 2 +! R represent a di erentiable utility function. In economics the marginal rate of substitution (MRS) at a bundle x = x is de ned as @u (x ) = @u @x 2 (x ) : Let us consider a monotonic transformation of u. In particular, let us de ne v (x) = g [u (x)] with g (x) > for all x 2 R 2 +: At x = x the MRS for v is g [u (x )] @u (x ) =g [u (x )] @u @x 2 (x ) = @u (x ) = @u @x 2 (x ) and coincides with the MRS for u. Therefore, MRS is an ordinal concept. N Quasiconcave and Pseudoconcave Functions We showed in previous notes that concavity plays a key role in optimization, as it guarantees that local and global maxima coincide. Unfortunately, concavity is not an ordinal property and it is then a very strong assumption in some economic models, e.g. consumer theory. Fortunately, many of the proofs we provided still hold with weaker inequalities. Quasiconcavity and pseudoconcavity are two of the most well-known generalizations of concavity with applications in mathematical economics and mathematical programming. The de nition of quasiconcavity is as follows. De nition 3. (Quasiconcavity) A function f : R n! R is quasiconcave if, for all x; x 2 R n and all 2 [; 1], f x + (1 ) x min f (x) ; f x : We say that f is strictly quasiconcave if, for all x; x 2 R n such that x 6= x and all 2 (; 1) ; f x + (1 ) x > min f (x) ; f x : 2

The function f is said to be (strictly) quasiconvex if f is (strictly) quasiconcave. There is an alternative characterization of quasiconcavity in terms of upper level sets, that sheds light on the reason for which this kind of functions is so important in optimization. Theorem 4. A function f : R n! R is quasiconcave if and only if UC f (y) is a convex set for all y in the range of f. Proof. (Prove this result.) There are many functions that satisfy De nition 3 (and Theorem 4) but that are not concave, e.g. f : R! R where f (x) = x 3 : In Note 5 we described a concave function as a function that has a convex hypograph and, as a by product of this characteristic, its upper level sets are convex. The graph of a quasiconcave function need not have the former property. It follows that the class of quasiconcave functions includes, but is larger than, the class of concave functions. The geometry of quasiconcave functions can be visualized with f : R 2 ++! R where f (x) = x 1 x 2 : The range of this function is R ++ and for any y 2 R ++ ; UC f (y) = x 2 R 2 ++ : x 1 y=x 2 is certainly a convex set 1 (draw a picture!). However, this function is not concave; for instance the Hessian is @ 1 A, which is not negative semi-de nite. The visual way to realize about 1 the latter is with the hypograph of f, which is a subset of R 3 : To avoid the three dimensional problem, let us consider x = x 1 = x 2 : The hypograph itself is (y; x) 2 R 3 ++ : y x 1 x 2 and the subset of the hypograph where x = x 1 = x 2 is (y; x) 2 R 3 ++ : y x 2 : It is easy to check that (y; x) 2 R 3 ++ : y x 2 is not a convex set, which means that HG f is not convex. A nice example of a quasiconave function in Statistics is the probability density function of a random variable that is normally distributed.(show this statement.) As in the concave case, the theory of di erentiable quasiconcave functions can be very useful. Theorem 5. x; x 2 R n ; Suppose f : R n! R is C 1 : Then f is quasiconcave if and only if, for every f (x) f x implies Df x x x : If, moreover, x 6= x and f (x) f x implies Df x x x > 3

then f is strictly quasiconcave, but the converse statement is not necessarily true. Proof. See Madden (1986, pp. 21-211). There are also some useful second-derivative characterizations of quasiconcavity. Theorem 6. Let f : D! R be a C 2 function de ned on an open and convex set D R n, and let us de ne the following bordered Hessian matrix @f : : : @f @ Hr 2 f = : : : @x 2 1 B. @..... @ 2 f @x r : : : @f @x r @f @x r @ 2 f @x r @ 2 f @x 2 r 1 : C A (a) A necessary condition for the quasiconcavity of f is that ( 1) r H r for all r = 1; :::; n and all x 2 D: (b) A su cient condition for the quasiconcavity of f is that ( 1) r Hr > for all r = 1; :::; n and all x 2 R n +: (c) If D R n ++, f is monotonically increasing and then f is strictly quasiconcave. ( 1) r Hr > for all r = 1; :::; n and all x 2 D Let f be a C 1 quasiconcave function, and x and x two points in its domain with f (x) f (x ) : Theorem 5 above says that the directional derivative of f at the "lower" point, x, in the direction of the "higher" point, x, in nonnegative. Roughly speaking, the derivative gives us the correct signal about the direction of change of the function, which is quite helpful when looking for a maximum. Notice, however, that plain quasiconcavity is compatible with a zero directional derivative at x even if f (x) > f (x ). Hence, a zero gradient could send the wrong signal that x is a candidate for a maximum. Strict quasiconcavity rules out this possibility, as does pseudoconcavity a concept we now de ne. 4

De nition 7. (Pseudoconcavity) A C 1 function f : R n! R is pseudoconcave if for every x; x 2 R n we have f (x) > f x implies Df x x x > (1) or, equivalently, Df x x x implies f (x) f x : (2) The function f is said to be pseudoconvex if f is pseudoconcave. A pseudoconcave function can be characterized as a quasiconcave function having a maximum at x whenever Df (x ) = (; :::; ) : Note that strict quasiconcavity implies pseudoconcavity, but quasiconcavity does not. Remark. It can be shown that for nonstationary functions, quasiconcavity does in fact imply pseudoconcavity. Some Properties of Quasiconcave Functions Quasiconcavity is often hard to prove. The following composition results simplify the test in some circumstances. Theorem 8. Suppose f : R n! R and g : R n! R are two functions such that f (x) = kg (x) where k 2 R: If g is quasiconcave then f is quasiconcave if k > and quasiconvex if k < : Proof. (Show this result.) What is a bit surprising is that the sum of quasiconcave functions need not be quasiconcave. (For instance, suppose h (x) = x 3 + x and g (x) = 2x, both with domains R: Show that h (x) and g (x) are both quasiconcave, while h (x) + g (x) is not.) Let us now consider functions of functions, i.e. f (x) = h [g (x)] : To be precise suppose g : D! R where D R n has range E R, and suppose that h : E! R: Then f is de ned by f : D! R with values f (x) = h [g (x)] : The next theorem states that any monotonic transformation of a quasiconcave function is quasiconcave. This means that quasiconcavity is in fact an ordinal property! 5

Theorem 9. Suppose D R n is convex, g : D! R has range E and h : E! R. De ne f : D! R by f (x) = h [g (x)] : If h is a monotonic transformation and g is quasiconcave, then f is quasiconcave. The operation of taking monotonic transformations of a function has the important property of leaving the level sets unchanged in a certain sense. The proof of the previous theorem follows as a direct implication of the next result. Theorem 1. If f is a monotonic transformation (h) of the function g (under the assumptions of Theorem 9 above) then for all y in the range of g we get UC g (y) = UC f [h (y)], LC g (y) = LC f [h (y)] and C g (y) = C f [h (y)] : Proof. To show the rst statement recall that UC g (y) = fx 2 D : g (x) yg ; and UC f [h (y)] = fx 2 D : f (x) = h [g (x)] h (y)g : Since h is monotone increasing, h [g (x)] h (y) if and only if g (x) y: Hence UC f [h (y)] = fx 2 D : g (x) yg = UC g (y) : The other two claims are similar. When a function undergoes a monotonic transformation, its level map remains the same, except that the value labelling on a level set changes from y to h (y) : Similarly for upper and lower level sets. Theorem 9 is an immediate implication of this result. If g is quasiconcave, then UC g (y) is a convex set. By Theorem 1 the upper level sets of f are the same as those of g (except for the labelling) and therefore must be convex sets. So f is quasiconcave. 2 Consider for instance a function f : R n ++! R where f (x) = : De ne g : R n ++! R by g (x) = P n i=1 x1=2 i Pn i=1 x1=2 i and h : R ++! R by h (y) = y 2 : Now g (:) is a concave function (and then quasiconcave), and h is a monotonic transformation. Then f is a quasiconcave function. 6