IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/riceco/2002-09.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Simple Axiomatization and Constructive Representation Proof for Choquet Expected Utility

Author

Listed:
  • Grant, Simon

    (Rice U)

  • Chateauneuf, Alain

    (Universite Paris I)

  • Eichberger, Jurgen

    (Universitat Heidelberg)

Abstract

We provide a simple and intuitive set of axioms that allow for a direct and constructive proof of the Choquet Expected Utility representation for decision making under uncertainty.

Suggested Citation

  • Grant, Simon & Chateauneuf, Alain & Eichberger, Jurgen, 2002. "A Simple Axiomatization and Constructive Representation Proof for Choquet Expected Utility," Working Papers 2002-09, Rice University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecl:riceco:2002-09
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~econ/papers/2002papers/09Grant.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-587, May.
    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. Frederik S. Herzberg, 2013. "The (im)possibility of collective risk measurement: Arrovian aggregation of variational preferences," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 1(1), pages 69-92, May.
    2. Federica Ceron & Vassili Vergopoulos, 2021. "On stochastic independence under ambiguity," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(3), pages 925-960, April.

    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. Li, Wenhui & Wilde, Christian, 2020. "Belief formation and belief updating under ambiguity: Evidence from experiments," SAFE Working Paper Series 251, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2020.
    2. Jean-Yves Jaffray & Meglena Jeleva, 2004. "How to deal with partially analyzed acts? A proposal," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques v04098, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    3. Berger, Loïc & Bleichrodt, Han & Eeckhoudt, Louis, 2013. "Treatment decisions under ambiguity," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 559-569.
    4. Qi Nan Zhai, 2015. "Asset Pricing Under Ambiguity and Heterogeneity," PhD Thesis, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney, number 16, July-Dece.
    5. Ralph W. Bailey & Jürgen Eichberger & David Kelsey, 2005. "Ambiguity and Public Good Provision in Large Societies," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 7(5), pages 741-759, December.
    6. Sarin, Rakesh & Wakker, Peter P., 2000. "Cumulative dominance and probabilistic sophistication," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 191-196, September.
    7. Soo Hong Chew & Bin Miao & Songfa Zhong, 2023. "Ellsberg meets Keynes at an urn," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 14(3), pages 1133-1162, July.
    8. Brice Mayag & Michel Grabisch & Christophe Labreuche, 2009. "A characterization of the 2-additive Choquet integral through cardinal information," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00445132, HAL.
    9. Jürgen Eichberger & Simon Grant & David Kelsey, 2012. "When is ambiguity–attitude constant?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 239-263, December.
    10. Shi, Yun & Cui, Xiangyu & Zhou, Xunyu, 2020. "Beta and Coskewness Pricing: Perspective from Probability Weighting," SocArXiv 5rqhv, Center for Open Science.
    11. Adam Dominiak & Jean-Philippe Lefort, 2011. "Unambiguous events and dynamic Choquet preferences," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 46(3), pages 401-425, April.
    12. Laslier, Jean-François & Núñez, Matías & Remzi Sanver, M., 2021. "A solution to the two-person implementation problem," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    13. Yasuhiro Sakai, 2019. "Daniel Ellsberg on J.M. Keynes and F.H. Knight: risk ambiguity and uncertainty," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 1-18, June.
    14. Konstantinos Georgalos, 2016. "Dynamic decision making under ambiguity," Working Papers 112111041, Lancaster University Management School, Economics Department.
    15. Eric Danan & Thibault Gajdos & Brian Hill & Jean-Marc Tallon, 2016. "Robust Social Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(9), pages 2407-2425, September.
    16. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2019. "What are axiomatizations good for?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(3), pages 339-359, May.
    17. Giovanni Bonaccolto & Massimiliano Caporin & Sandra Paterlini, 2018. "Asset allocation strategies based on penalized quantile regression," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 1-32, January.
    18. 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.
    19. Evan Piermont, 2021. "Hypothetical Expected Utility," Papers 2106.15979, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2021.
    20. ,, 2014. "Second order beliefs models of choice under imprecise risk: non-additive second order beliefs vs. nonlinear second order utility," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(3), September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    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:ecl:riceco:2002-09. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dericus.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.