IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v81y2003i3p379-382.html

How quasi rational are you II? Chern curvature measures local failure of the expected utility maximization axioms

Author

Listed:
  • Russell, Thomas

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Russell, Thomas, 2003. "How quasi rational are you II? Chern curvature measures local failure of the expected utility maximization axioms," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 81(3), pages 379-382, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:81:y:2003:i:3:p:379-382
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-1765(03)00221-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Russell, Thomas, 1997. "How quasi-rational are you?: A behavioral interpretation of a two form which measures non-integrability of a system of demand equations," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 181-186, October.
    2. 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. Cooper, James B. & Russell, Thomas & Samuelson, Paul A., 2004. "Testing the expected utility maximization hypothesis with limited experimental data," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 391-407, August.
    2. Victor H. Aguiar & Roberto Serrano, 2013. "Slutsky Matrix Norms and the Size of Bounded Rationality," Working Papers 2013-16, Brown University, Department of Economics.

    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. Attila Ambrus & Kareen Rozen, 2015. "Rationalising Choice with Multi‐self Models," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 125(585), pages 1136-1156, June.
    2. Minghao Pan, 2022. "Risk and Intertemporal Preferences over Time Lotteries," Papers 2209.01790, arXiv.org.
    3. Francesco Cerigioni & Simone Galperti, 2021. "Listing specs: The effect of framing attributes on choice," Economics Working Papers 1775, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    4. Fleurbaey, Marc & Zuber, Stéphane, 2015. "Discounting, beyond utilitarianism," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 9, pages 1-52.
    5. Karl Mosler, 1997. "De minimis and equity in risk," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 215-233, May.
    6. Castagnoli, Erio & LiCalzi, Marco, 2006. "Benchmarking real-valued acts," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 236-253, November.
    7. 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.
    8. Luciano Andreozzi & Matteo Ploner & Ivan Soraperra, 2013. "Justice among strangers. On altruism, inequality aversion and fairness," CEEL Working Papers 1304, Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
    9. M. Ali Khan & Edward E. Schlee, 2016. "On Lionel McKenzie's 1957 intrusion into 20th-century demand theory," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 49(2), pages 589-636, May.
    10. Martin Sandbu, 2008. "Axiomatic foundations for fairness-motivated preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(4), pages 589-619, December.
    11. Matthew Polisson, 2018. "A lattice test for additive separability," IFS Working Papers W18/08, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    12. Peter Fishburn, 1979. "Evaluative comparisons of distributions of a social variable: Ordering methods," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 103-126, January.
    13. Konishi, Hideo & Fishburn, Peter, 1996. "Quasi-linear utility in a discrete choice model," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 197-200, May.
    14. Streufert, P. A., 1995. "A general theory of separability for preferences defined on a countably infinite product space," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 407-434.
    15. Mongin, Philippe & Pivato, Marcus, 2015. "Ranking multidimensional alternatives and uncertain prospects," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 146-171.
    16. Franz Dietrich & Christian List, 2011. "A model of non-informational preference change," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 23(2), pages 145-164, April.
    17. Hougaard, Jens Leth & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D. & Østerdal, Lars Peter, 2013. "A new axiomatic approach to the evaluation of population health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 515-523.
    18. Chambers, Christopher P. & Echenique, Federico, 2020. "Spherical preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    19. Yoko Kawada & Yuta Nakamura & Shuhei Otani, 2019. "An Axiomatic Foundation of the Multiplicative Human Development Index," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 65(4), pages 771-784, December.
    20. Rodríguez-Míguez, Eva & Herrero, Carmen & Pinto-Prades, José Luis, 2004. "Using a point system in the management of waiting lists: the case of cataracts," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 585-594, August.

    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:ecolet:v:81:y:2003:i:3:p:379-382. 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/ecolet .

    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.