IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/eee/mateco/v4y1977i1p1-56.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Concavifiability and constructions of concave utility functions

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as


Cited by:

  1. Cherchye, Laurens & De Rock, Bram & Vermeulen, Frederic, 2010. "An Afriat Theorem for the collective model of household consumption," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(3), pages 1142-1163, May.
  2. Nejat Anbarci & Nick Feltovich, 2013. "How sensitive are bargaining outcomes to changes in disagreement payoffs?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(4), pages 560-596, December.
  3. 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.
  4. Driesen, Bram & Lombardi, Michele & Peters, Hans, 2016. "Feasible sets, comparative risk aversion, and comparative uncertainty aversion in bargaining," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 162-170.
  5. Claus-Jochen Haake & Bettina Klaus, 2009. "Monotonicity and Nash implementation in matching markets with contracts," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 41(3), pages 393-410, December.
  6. Cesar Martinelli & Mikhail Freer, 2016. "General Revealed Preferences," Working Papers 1059, George Mason University, Interdisciplinary Center for Economic Science, revised Jun 2016.
  7. Bolte, Jérôme & Pauwels, Edouard, 2020. "Curiosities and counterexamples in smooth convex optimization," TSE Working Papers 20-1080, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
  8. John S. Chipman, 2010. "The Utility-Possibility Frontier," Chapters, in: Mark Blaug & Peter Lloyd (ed.),Famous Figures and Diagrams in Economics, chapter 34, Edward Elgar Publishing.
  9. Kalandrakis, Tasos, 2010. "Rationalizable voting," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 5(1), January.
  10. Kannai, Yakar, 1989. "A characterization of monotone individual demand functions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 87-94, February.
  11. Apartsin, Yevgenia & Kannai, Yakar, 2006. "Demand properties of concavifiable preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 36-55, December.
  12. 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.
  13. Paolo Giovanni Piacquadio, 2017. "A Fairness Justification of Utilitarianism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 1261-1276, July.
  14. Ali Khan, M. & Schlee, Edward E., 2017. "The nonconcavity of money-metric utility: A new formulation and proof," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 10-12.
  15. 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.
  16. van Birgelen, M.J.H. & de Ruyter, J.C. & Wetzels, M.G.M., 2000. "The impact of attitude strength on the use of customer satisfaction information: an empirical investigation," Research Memorandum 037, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  17. Maria Gallego, David Scoones, 2005. "The Art of Compromise," Working Papers eg0042, Wilfrid Laurier University, Department of Economics, revised 2005.
  18. Rausser, Gordon C. & Simon, Leo K., 2016. "Nash bargaining and risk aversion," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 1-9.
  19. Jonathan Shalev, 2002. "Loss Aversion and Bargaining," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 201-232, May.
  20. Aase, Knut K., 2008. "The Nash Bargaining Solution vs. Equilibrium in a Reinsurance Syndicate," Discussion Papers 2008/5, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
  21. Caroline Berden & Hans Peters, 2006. "On the Effect of Risk Aversion in Bimatrix Games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 60(4), pages 359-370, June.
  22. John K.-H. Quah, 2000. "The Monotonicity of Individual and Market Demand," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(4), pages 911-930, July.
  23. Gomez, Juan Camilo, 2006. "Achieving efficiency with manipulative bargainers," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 254-263, November.
  24. Monteiro, Paulo Klinger, 2010. "A Class of Convex Preferences Without Concave Representation," Revista Brasileira de Economia - RBE, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil), vol. 64(1), March.
  25. Hayashi, Takashi, 2008. "A note on small income effects," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 360-379, March.
  26. 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.
  27. Volij, Oscar & Winter, Eyal, 2002. "On risk aversion and bargaining outcomes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 120-140, October.
  28. 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.
  29. 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.
  30. 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.
  31. Eguia, Jon X., 2011. "Foundations of spatial preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 200-205, March.
  32. Fatma Lajeri-Chaherli, 2016. "On The Concavity And Quasiconcavity Properties Of ( Σ , Μ ) Utility Functions," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(3), pages 287-296, April.
  33. John K.-H. Quah, 2000. "The Weak Axiom and Comparative Statics," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 0437, Econometric Society.
  34. Jon Eguia, 2013. "On the spatial representation of preference profiles," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 52(1), pages 103-128, January.
  35. repec:dgr:umamet:2009030 is not listed on IDEAS
  36. Kobberling, Veronika & Peters, Hans, 2003. "The effect of decision weights in bargaining problems," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 154-175, May.
  37. 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.
  38. Charles-Cadogan, G., 2018. "Losses loom larger than gains and reference dependent preferences in Bernoulli’s utility function," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 220-237.
  39. Cressman, Ross & Gallego, Maria, 2009. "On the ranking of bilateral bargaining opponents," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 64-83, July.
  40. Levin, Vladimir L., 1997. "Reduced cost functions and their applications," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 155-186, September.
  41. Kannai, Yakar, 2004. "When is individual demand concavifiable?," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-2), pages 59-69, February.
  42. Ehud Kalai, 1983. "Solutions to the Bargaining Problem," Discussion Papers 556, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
  43. John Chipman, 2006. "Pareto and contemporary economic theory," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 53(4), pages 451-475, December.
  44. 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..
IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.