IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2212.02680.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bounded arbitrage and nearly rational behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Leandro Nascimento

Abstract

We establish the equivalence between a principle of almost absence of arbitrage opportunities and nearly rational decision-making. The implications of such principle are considered in the context of the aggregation of probabilistic opinions and of stochastic choice functions. In the former a bounded arbitrage principle and its equivalent form as an approximately Pareto condition are shown to bound the difference between the collective probabilistic assessment of a set of states and a linear aggregation rule on the individual assessments. In the latter we show that our general principle of limited arbitrage opportunities translates into a weakening of the McFadden-Richter axiom of stochastic rationality, and gives an upper bound for the minimum distance of a stochastic choice function to another in the class of random utility maximization models.

Suggested Citation

  • Leandro Nascimento, 2022. "Bounded arbitrage and nearly rational behavior," Papers 2212.02680, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2023.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2212.02680
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2212.02680
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Samet, Dov, 1998. "Common Priors and Separation of Convex Sets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 24(1-2), pages 172-174, July.
    2. Robert F. Nau, 1992. "Joint Coherence in Games of Incomplete Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(3), pages 374-387, March.
    3. Ziv Hellman, 2013. "Almost common priors," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 42(2), pages 399-410, May.
    4. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel A Ballester, 2021. "Separating Predicted Randomness from Residual Behavior," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 1041-1076.
    5. Mongin Philippe, 1995. "Consistent Bayesian Aggregation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 313-351, August.
    6. A. Dax & V. P. Sreedharan, 1997. "Theorems of the Alternative and Duality," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 94(3), pages 561-590, September.
    7. Robert Nau, 2015. "Risk-neutral equilibria of noncooperative games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 78(2), pages 171-188, February.
    8. Alan Beggs, 2021. "Afriat and arbitrage," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 9(2), pages 167-176, October.
    9. Radner, Roy, 1980. "Collusive behavior in noncooperative epsilon-equilibria of oligopolies with long but finite lives," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 136-154, April.
    10. Michael Nielsen, 2019. "On linear aggregation of infinitely many finitely additive probability measures," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(3), pages 421-436, May.
    11. Nau, Robert F, 1995. "Coherent Decision Analysis with Inseparable Probabilities and Utilities," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 71-91, January.
    12. Nau, Robert F. & McCardle, Kevin F., 1990. "Coherent behavior in noncooperative games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 424-444, April.
    13. Daniel McFadden, 2005. "Revealed stochastic preference: a synthesis," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 26(2), pages 245-264, August.
    14. Alison L. Gibbs & Francis Edward Su, 2002. "On Choosing and Bounding Probability Metrics," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 70(3), pages 419-435, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Robert Nau, 2001. "De Finetti was Right: Probability Does Not Exist," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 89-124, December.
    2. Robert Nau, 2015. "Risk-neutral equilibria of noncooperative games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 78(2), pages 171-188, February.
    3. Christian Gollier, 2007. "Whom should we believe? Aggregation of heterogeneous beliefs," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 107-127, October.
    4. Ziv Hellman & Miklós Pintér, 2022. "Charges and bets: a general characterisation of common priors," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 51(3), pages 567-587, November.
    5. Majumdar, Dipjyoti, 2004. "An axiomatic characterization of Bayes' Rule," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 261-273, May.
    6. Itzhak Gilboa & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2014. "No‐Betting‐Pareto Dominance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(4), pages 1405-1442, July.
    7. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2003:i:11:p:1-12 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Gizatulina, Alia & Hellman, Ziv, 2019. "No trade and yes trade theorems for heterogeneous priors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 161-184.
    9. Marco Scarsini & Yossi Feinberg, 2003. "Rate of Arbitrage and Reconciled Beliefs," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(11), pages 1-12.
    10. Dekel, Eddie & Siniscalchi, Marciano, 2015. "Epistemic Game Theory," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    11. Efe A. Ok & Gerelt Tserenjigmid, 2023. "Measuring Stochastic Rationality," Papers 2303.08202, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    12. Barelli, Paulo, 2009. "Consistency of beliefs and epistemic conditions for Nash and correlated equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 363-375, November.
    13. Feinberg, Yossi, 2000. "Characterizing Common Priors in the Form of Posteriors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 127-179, April.
    14. Guarino, Pierfrancesco & Tsakas, Elias, 2021. "Common priors under endogenous uncertainty," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    15. David McCarthy & Kalle Mikkola & Teruji Thomas, 2019. "Aggregation for potentially infinite populations without continuity or completeness," Papers 1911.00872, arXiv.org.
    16. Ziv Hellman & Miklós Pintér, 2020. "Charges and Bets: A General Characterisation of Common Priors," Working Papers 2020-06, Bar-Ilan University, Department of Economics.
    17. Askoura, Youcef & Billot, Antoine, 2021. "Social decision for a measure society," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    18. Yuichi Kitamura & Jörg Stoye, 2013. "Nonparametric analysis of random utility models: testing," CeMMAP working papers 36/13, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    19. Edi Karni & Philippe Mongin, 2000. "On the Determination of Subjective Probability by Choices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 233-248, February.
    20. Ambrus, Attila & Pathak, Parag A., 2011. "Cooperation over finite horizons: A theory and experiments," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7), pages 500-512.
    21. Eric Danan & Thibault Gajdos & Jean-Marc Tallon, 2015. "Harsanyi's Aggregation Theorem with Incomplete Preferences," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(1), pages 61-69, February.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2212.02680. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.