IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/mateco/v25y1996i3p281-290.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cycle-preserving extension of demand functions to new commodities

Author

Listed:
  • Peters, Hans
  • Wakker, Peter

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Peters, Hans & Wakker, Peter, 1996. "Cycle-preserving extension of demand functions to new commodities," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 281-290.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:mateco:v:25:y:1996:i:3:p:281-290
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0304-4068(95)00733-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hugh Rose, 1958. "Consistency of Preference: The Two-Commodity Case," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 25(2), pages 124-125.
    2. Shafer, Wayne J., 1977. "Revealed preference cycles and the slutsky matrix," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 293-309, December.
    3. Peters, Hans & Wakker, Peter, 1991. "Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives and Revealed Group Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(6), pages 1787-1801, November.
    4. Kim, Taesung & Richter, Marcel K., 1986. "Nontransitive-nontotal consumer theory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 324-363, April.
    5. Kehoe, Timothy J., 1992. "Gross substitutability and the weak axiom of revealed preference," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 37-50.
    6. Peters Hans & Wakker Peter, 1994. "WARP Does Not Imply SARP for More Than Two Commodities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 152-160, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jan Heufer, 2014. "A geometric approach to revealed preference via Hamiltonian cycles," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(3), pages 329-341, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cherchye, Laurens & Demuynck, Thomas & De Rock, Bram, 2018. "Transitivity of preferences: when does it matter?," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(3), September.
    2. Jan Heufer, 2007. "Revealed Preference and the Number of Commodities," Ruhr Economic Papers 0036, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    3. Walter Bossert & David Donaldson & Charles Blackorby, 1999. "Rationalizable solutions to pure population problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 16(3), pages 395-407.
    4. Hans Peters & Panos Protopapas, 2021. "Set and revealed preference axioms for multi-valued choice," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 90(1), pages 11-29, February.
    5. Özgür Kıbrıs, 2012. "A revealed preference analysis of solutions to simple allocation problems," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(4), pages 509-523, April.
    6. Heufer, Jan, 2007. "Revealed Preference and the Number of Commodities," Ruhr Economic Papers 36, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    7. Bossert, Walter & Peters, Hans, 2019. "Choice on the simplex domain," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 63-72.
    8. repec:zbw:rwirep:0036 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Jan Heufer, 2014. "A geometric approach to revealed preference via Hamiltonian cycles," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(3), pages 329-341, March.
    10. Bossert, Walter, 1998. "Welfarism and rationalizability in allocation problems with indivisibilities1," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 133-150, March.
    11. Cherchye, Laurens & Demuynck, Thomas & De Rock, Bram, 2018. "Transitivity of preferences: when does it matter?," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(3), September.
    12. John, Reinhard, 1997. "A Simple Cycle Preserving Extension of a Demand Function," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 442-445, February.
    13. Aguiar, Victor H. & Hjertstrand, Per & Serrano, Roberto, 2020. "A Rationalization of the Weak Axiom of Revealed Preference," Working Paper Series 1321, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    14. Victor Aguiar & Roberto Serrano, 2015. "Slutsky Matrix Norms and Revealed Preference Tests of Consumer Behaviour," Working Papers 2015-1, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    15. Walter Bossert & Hans Peters, 2009. "Single-peaked choice," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 41(2), pages 213-230, November.
    16. Bossert, Walter, 1996. "The Kaldor compensation test and rational choice," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 265-276, February.
    17. Hosoya, Yuhki, 2013. "Measuring utility from demand," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 82-96.
    18. Victor H. Aguiar & Per Hjertstrand & Roberto Serrano, 2020. "Rationalizable Incentives: Interim Implementation of Sets in Rationalizable Strategies," Working Papers 2020-16, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    19. Ok, Efe A., 1998. "Inequality averse collective choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 301-321, October.
    20. Bart Smeulders & Laurens Cherchye & Bram Rock & Frits C. R. Spieksma & Fabrice Talla Nobibon, 2015. "Transitive preferences in multi-member households," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(2), pages 243-254, October.
    21. Michele Lombardi & Marco Mariotti, 2009. "Uncovered bargaining solutions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 38(4), pages 601-610, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:mateco:v:25:y:1996:i:3:p:281-290. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jmateco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.