IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login

Citations for "Concavifiability and constructions of concave utility functions"

by Kannai, Yakar

For a complete description of this item, click here. For a RSS feed for citations of this item, click here.
as in new window

  1. Volij, Oscar & Winter, Eyal, 2002. "On risk aversion and bargaining outcomes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 120-140, October.
  2. Ross Cressman, Maria Gallego, 2005. "On the Ranking of Bilateral Bargaining Opponents," Working Papers eg0043, Wilfrid Laurier University, Department of Economics, revised 2005.
  3. Laurens Cherchye & Bram De Rock & Frederic Vermeulen, 2008. "An Afriat Theorem for the collective model of household consumption," Center for Economic Studies - Discussion papers ces0825, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën.
  4. Kannai, Yakar, 2004. "When is individual demand concavifiable?," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-2), pages 59-69, February.
  5. Kannai, Yakar, 1989. "A characterization of monotone individual demand functions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 87-94, February.
  6. Berden Caroline & Peters Hans, 2005. "On the effect of risk aversion in bimatrix games," Research Memorandum 029, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  7. John K.-H. Quah, 2000. "The Weak Axiom and Comparative Statics," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 0437, Econometric Society.
  8. John Chipman, 2006. "Pareto and contemporary economic theory," International Review of Economics, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 451-475, December.
  9. Eguia, Jon X., 2011. "Foundations of spatial preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 200-205, March.
  10. Christopher Connell & Eric Rasmusen, 2012. "Concavifying the Quasiconcave," Working Papers 2012-10, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy.
  11. Richter, Marcel K. & Wong, K.-C.Kam-Chau, 2004. "Concave utility on finite sets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 341-357, April.
  12. Levin, Vladimir L., 1997. "Reduced cost functions and their applications," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 155-186, September.
  13. Peters Hans & Köbberling Vera, 2000. "The Effect of Decision Weights in Bargaining Problems," Research Memorandum 037, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  14. Sanxi Li & Hailin Sun & Jianye Yan & Xundong Yin, 2015. "Risk aversion in the Nash bargaining problem with uncertainty," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 257-274, July.
  15. Nejat Anbarci & Nick Feltovich, 2013. "How sensitive are bargaining outcomes to changes in disagreement payoffs?," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 560-596, December.
  16. Rosa L. Matzkin, 1990. "Least Concavity and the Distribution-Free Estimation of Non-Parametric Concave Functions," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 958, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
  17. Driesen, Bram & Perea, Andrés & Peters, Hans, 2011. "The Kalai-Smorodinsky bargaining solution with loss aversion," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 58-64, January.
  18. Maria Gallego, David Scoones, 2005. "The Art of Compromise," Working Papers eg0042, Wilfrid Laurier University, Department of Economics, revised 2005.
  19. Aase, Knut K., 2008. "The Nash Bargaining Solution vs. Equilibrium in a Reinsurance Syndicate," Discussion Papers 2008/5, Department of Business and Management Science, Norwegian School of Economics.
  20. Hailin Sun & Sanxi Li & Tong Wang, 2013. "Change in risk and bargaining game," University of East Anglia Applied and Financial Economics Working Paper Series 036, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
  21. Jonathan Shalev, 2002. "Loss Aversion and Bargaining," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 201-232, May.
  22. Reny, Philip J., 2013. "A simple proof of the nonconcavifiability of functions with linear not-all-parallel contour sets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 506-508.
  23. Quah, J-K-H, 1996. "The Monotonicity of Individual and Market Demand," Economics Papers 127, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
  24. Jon Eguia, 2013. "On the spatial representation of preference profiles," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 103-128, January.
  25. Gomez, Juan Camilo, 2006. "Achieving efficiency with manipulative bargainers," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 254-263, November.
  26. Kibris, Ozgur, 2002. "Misrepresentation of Utilities in Bargaining: Pure Exchange and Public Good Economies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 91-110, April.
  27. Tasos Kalandrakis, 2008. "Rationalizable Voting," Wallis Working Papers WP51, University of Rochester - Wallis Institute of Political Economy.
  28. Driesen Bram & Perea Andrés & Peters Hans, 2009. "The Kalai-Smorodinsky Solution with Loss Aversion," Research Memorandum 030, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  29. Eguia, Jon X., 2008. "The Foundations of Spatial Preferences," Working Papers 08-01, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
  30. Apartsin, Yevgenia & Kannai, Yakar, 2006. "Demand properties of concavifiable preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 36-55, December.
  31. Lajeri-Chaherli, Fatma, 2003. "Partial derivatives, comparative risk behavior and concavity of utility functions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 81-99, August.
  32. Ehud Kalai, 1983. "Solutions to the Bargaining Problem," Discussion Papers 556, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.