Advertisement

On linear aggregation of infinitely many finitely additive probability measures

  • Michael NielsenEmail author
Article
  • 17 Downloads

Abstract

We discuss Herzberg’s (Theory Decis 78(2):319–337, 2015) treatment of linear aggregation for profiles of infinitely many finitely additive probabilities and suggest a natural alternative to his definition of linear continuous aggregation functions. We then prove generalizations of well-known characterization results due to (J Am Stat Assoc 76(374):410–414, 1981). We also characterize linear aggregation of probabilities in terms of a Pareto condition, de Finetti’s notion of coherence, and convexity.

Keywords

Probability aggregation Linear aggregation Finitely additive probability Coherence Integral representations 

Notes

References

  1. Aczél, J. (2006). Lectures on functional equations and their applications. North Chelmsford: Courier Corporation.Google Scholar
  2. Aliprantis, C. D., & Border, K. C. (2006). Infinite dimensional analysis: A Hitchhiker’s guide. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  3. Berti, P., Pratelli, L., & Rigo, P. (2013). Finitely additive equivalent martingale measures. Journal of Theoretical Probability, 26(1), 46–57.Google Scholar
  4. Berti, P., Pratelli, L., & Rigo, P. (2014). A unifying view on some problems in probability and statistics. Statistical Methods & Applications, 23(4), 483–500.Google Scholar
  5. Cassese, G. (2017). The representation of conglomerative functionals. In M. B. Ferraro, P. Giordani, B. Vantaggi, M. Gagolewski, M. Á. Gil, P. Grzegorzewski, & O. Hryniewicz (Eds.), Soft methods for data science (Vol. 456, pp. 103–111). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  6. Cassese, G. (2018). Conglomerability and representations. Journal of Convex Analysis, 25(3), 789–815.Google Scholar
  7. de Finetti, B. (1974). Theory of Probability, (Vol. 1). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  8. Diecidue, E. (2006). Deriving Harsanyi’s utilitarianism from de Finetti’s book-making argument. Theory and Decision, 61(4), 363–371.Google Scholar
  9. Diecidue, E., & Wakker, P. P. (2002). Dutch books: Avoiding strategic and dynamic complications, and a comonotonic extension. Mathematical Social Sciences, 43(2), 135–149.Google Scholar
  10. Dubins, L. E. (1975). Finitely additive conditional probabilities, conglomerability and disintegrations. The Annals of Probability, 3(1), 89–99.Google Scholar
  11. Genest, C., & Zidek, J. V. (1986). Combining probability distributions: A critique and an annotated bibliography. Statistical Science, 1(1), 114–135.Google Scholar
  12. Harsanyi, J. C. (1955). Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics, and interpersonal comparisons of utility. Journal of Political Economy, 63(4), 309–321.Google Scholar
  13. Herzberg, F. (2015). Aggregating infinitely many probability measures. Theory and Decision, 78(2), 319–337.Google Scholar
  14. Lane, D. A., & Sudderth, W. D. (1984). Coherent predictive inference. Sankhyā: The Indian Journal of Statistics. Series A: The Indian Journal of Statistics, Series A, 46(2), 166–185.Google Scholar
  15. McConway, K. J. (1981). Marginalization and linear opinion pools. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 76(374), 410–414.Google Scholar
  16. Oxtoby, J. C. (2013). Measure and category: A survey of the analogies between topological and measure spaces (2nd ed.). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  17. Rao, K . B., & Rao, M . B. (1983). Theory of charges: A study of finitely additive measures, volume 109 of pure and applied mathematics. Cambridge: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  18. Schirokauer, O., & Kadane, J. B. (2007). Uniform distributions on the natural numbers. Journal of Theoretical Probability, 20(3), 429–441.Google Scholar
  19. Stewart, R. T., & Ojea Quintana, I. (2018). Probabilistic opinion pooling with imprecise probabilities. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 47(1), 17–45.Google Scholar
  20. Thill, M. (2008). Closed convex hulls, contents, and k-spectral states. Mathematische Nachrichten, 281(2), 297–303.Google Scholar
  21. Wagner, C. (1982). Allocation, Lehrer models, and the consensus of probabilities. Theory and Decision, 14(2), 207–220.Google Scholar
  22. Zhou, L. (1997). Harsanyi’s utilitarianism theorems: General societies. Journal of Economic Theory, 72(1), 198–207.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Columbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations