IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/qmw/qmwecw/702.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Preference Symmetries, Partial Differential Equations, and Functional Forms for Utility

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher J. Tyson

    (Queen Mary, University of London)

Abstract

A discrete symmetry of a preference relation is a mapping from the domain of choice to itself under which preference comparisons are invariant; a continuous symmetry is a one-parameter family of such transformations that includes the identity; and a symmetry field is a vector field whose trajectories generate a continuous symmetry. Any continuous symmetry of a preference relation implies that its representations satisfy a system of PDEs. Conversely the system implies the continuous symmetry if the latter is generated by a field. Moreover, solving the PDEs yields the functional form for utility equivalent to the symmetry. This framework is shown to encompass a variety of representation theorems related to univariate separability, multivariate separability, and homogeneity, including the cases of Cobb-Douglas and CES utility.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher J. Tyson, 2013. "Preference Symmetries, Partial Differential Equations, and Functional Forms for Utility," Working Papers 702, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
  • Handle: RePEc:qmw:qmwecw:702
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.qmul.ac.uk/sef/media/econ/research/workingpapers/2013/items/wp702.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Debreu, Gerard, 1976. "Smooth Preferences: A Corrigendum," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 44(4), pages 831-832, July.
    2. Ghirardato, Paolo & Maccheroni, Fabio & Marinacci, Massimo, 2005. "Certainty Independence and the Separation of Utility and Beliefs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 129-136, January.
    3. Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Aldo Rustichini, 2006. "Ambiguity Aversion, Robustness, and the Variational Representation of Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(6), pages 1447-1498, November.
    4. Debreu, Gerard, 1972. "Smooth Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 40(4), pages 603-615, July.
    5. Mas-Colell, Andreu, 1977. "Regular, Nonconvex Economies," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(6), pages 1387-1407, September.
    6. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
    7. Peter C. Fishburn, 1968. "Utility Theory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(5), pages 335-378, January.
    8. Gerard Debreu, 1959. "Topological Methods in Cardinal Utility Theory," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 76, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    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. Giacomo Corneo & Sergio Vergalli, 2016. "Taxes, subsidies, regulation in dynamic models," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 119(2), pages 97-99, October.
    2. A. Mantovi, 2013. "Differential duality," Economics Department Working Papers 2013-EP05, Department of Economics, Parma University (Italy).
    3. Andrea Mantovi, 2016. "Smooth preferences, symmetries and expansion vector fields," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 119(2), pages 147-169, October.

    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. Tyson, Christopher J., 2013. "Preference symmetries, partial differential equations, and functional forms for utility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 266-277.
    2. Pierpaolo Battigalli & Simone Cerreia-Vioglio & Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci, 2017. "Mixed extensions of decision problems under uncertainty," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 63(4), pages 827-866, April.
    3. Chateauneuf, Alain & Faro, José Heleno, 2009. "Ambiguity through confidence functions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(9-10), pages 535-558, September.
    4. Simone Cerreia-Vioglio & Paolo Ghirardato & Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Marciano Siniscalchi, 2011. "Rational preferences under ambiguity," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 48(2), pages 341-375, October.
    5. Madhav Chandrasekher & Mira Frick & Ryota Iijima & Yves Le Yaouanq, 2022. "Dual‐Self Representations of Ambiguity Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(3), pages 1029-1061, May.
    6. Alain Chateauneuf & Michèle Cohen, 2008. "Cardinal extensions of EU model based on the Choquet integral," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00348822, HAL.
    7. Robert Chambers & Tigran Melkonyan, 2008. "Eliciting beliefs," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 65(4), pages 271-284, December.
    8. Stanca, Lorenzo, 2020. "A simplified approach to subjective expected utility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 151-160.
    9. Hansen, Lars Peter & Sargent, Thomas J., 2022. "Structured ambiguity and model misspecification," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    10. Rhys Bidder & Ian Dew-Becker, 2016. "Long-Run Risk Is the Worst-Case Scenario," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(9), pages 2494-2527, September.
    11. Hansen, Lars Peter, 2013. "Uncertainty Outside and Inside Economic Models," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2013-7, Nobel Prize Committee.
    12. Michael Woodford, 2010. "Robustly Optimal Monetary Policy with Near-Rational Expectations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 274-303, March.
    13. Gajdos, Thibault & Maurin, Eric, 2004. "Unequal uncertainties and uncertain inequalities: an axiomatic approach," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 116(1), pages 93-118, May.
    14. Cerreia-Vioglio, Simone & Maccheroni, Fabio & Marinacci, Massimo & Montrucchio, Luigi, 2012. "Probabilistic sophistication, second order stochastic dominance and uncertainty aversion," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 271-283.
    15. Dräger, Lena & Lamla, Michael J. & Pfajfar, Damjan, 2020. "The Hidden Heterogeneity of Inflation and Interest Rate Expectations: The Role of Preferences," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-666, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät, revised Feb 2023.
    16. Sergio Turner, 2004. "Pareto Improving Taxation in Incomplete Markets," Econometric Society 2004 Latin American Meetings 310, Econometric Society.
    17. Thibault Gajdos & John Weymark, 2005. "Multidimensional generalized Gini indices," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 26(3), pages 471-496, October.
    18. He, Wei & Yannelis, Nicholas C., 2015. "Equilibrium theory under ambiguity," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 86-95.
    19. Jewitt, Ian & Mukerji, Sujoy, 2017. "Ordering ambiguous acts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 213-267.
    20. repec:ipg:wpaper:2014-061 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Jingyi Xue, 2020. "Preferences with changing ambiguity aversion," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 69(1), pages 1-60, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Continuous symmetry; Separability; Smooth preferences; Utility representation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C60 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - General
    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    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:qmw:qmwecw:702. 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: Nicholas Owen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deqmwuk.html .

    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.