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. Gomez, Juan Camilo, 2006. "Achieving efficiency with manipulative bargainers," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 254-263, November.
  2. 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.
  3. John Quah, 1999. "The Weak Axiom and Comparative Statics," Economics Series Working Papers 1999-W15, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  4. Caroline Berden & Hans Peters, 2006. "On the Effect of Risk Aversion in Bimatrix Games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 60(4), pages 359-370, 06.
  5. 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.
  6. 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).
  7. 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.
  8. Laurens Cherchye & Bram De Rock & Frederic Vermeulen, 2010. "An Afriat theorem for the collective model of household consumption," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/131711, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  9. 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..
  10. John Chipman, 2006. "Pareto and contemporary economic theory," International Review of Economics, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 451-475, December.
  11. Kannai, Yakar, 1989. "A characterization of monotone individual demand functions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 87-94, February.
  12. Quah, J-K-H, 1996. "The Monotonicity of Individual and Market Demand," Economics Papers 127, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
  13. Eguia, Jon X., 2008. "The Foundations of Spatial Preferences," Working Papers 08-01, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
  14. Levin, Vladimir L., 1997. "Reduced cost functions and their applications," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 155-186, September.
  15. Kannai, Yakar, 2004. "When is individual demand concavifiable?," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-2), pages 59-69, February.
  16. Cressman, Ross & Gallego, Maria, 2009. "On the ranking of bilateral bargaining opponents," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 64-83, July.
  17. Volij, Oscar & Winter, Eyal, 2002. "On risk aversion and bargaining outcomes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 120-140, October.
  18. 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.
  19. Jon Eguia, 2013. "On the spatial representation of preference profiles," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 103-128, January.
  20. SHALEV, Jonathan, 1997. "Loss aversion and bargaining," CORE Discussion Papers 1997006, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  21. 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.
  22. 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.
  23. Maria Gallego, David Scoones, 2005. "The Art of Compromise," Working Papers eg0042, Wilfrid Laurier University, Department of Economics, revised 2005.
  24. 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.
  25. 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).
  26. 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.
  27. Apartsin, Yevgenia & Kannai, Yakar, 2006. "Demand properties of concavifiable preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 36-55, December.
  28. Kalandrakis, Tasos, 2010. "Rationalizable voting," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 5(1), January.
  29. Eguia, Jon X., 2011. "Foundations of spatial preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 200-205, March.
  30. 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.
  31. 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.
  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.