Abstract
The aim of this paper is to present in a unified framework a survey of some results related to Choquet Expected Utility (CEU) models, a promising class of models introduced separately by Quiggin [35], Yaari [48] and Schmeidler [40, 41] which allow to separate attitudes towards uncertainty (or risk) from attitudes towards wealth, while respecting the first order stochastic dominance axiom.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
M. Allais, Le comportement de l'homme rationnel devant le risque: Critique des postulats et axiomes de l'école américaine, Econometrica 21 (1953) 503–546.
M. Allais, The general theory of random choices in relation to the invariant cardinal utility function and the specific probability function, in:Risk, Decision and Rationality, ed. B. R. Munier (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1988) pp. 233–289.
T. E. Armstrong, Comonotonicity, simplicial subdivision of cubes and non-linear expected utility via Choquet integrals, Working Paper, University of Maryland, MD (1990).
A. Chateauneuf, On the use of comonotonicity in the axiomatization of EURDP theory for arbitrary consequences, presented atFUR V, Durham, Working Paper, CERMSEM, Paris (1990).
A. Chateauneuf, On the use of capacities in modeling uncertainty aversion and risk aversion. J. Math. Econ. 20 (1991) 343–369.
A. Chateauneuf and M. Cohen, Risk seeking with diminishing marginal utility in a non-expected utility model, J. Risk and Uncertainty 9 (1994), to appear.
A. Chateauneuf and J. Y. Jaffray, Some characterizations of lower probabilities and other monotone capacities through the use of Möbius inversion, Math. Social Sci. 17 (1989) 263–283.
A. Chateauneuf, R. Kast and A. Lapied, Pricing in slack markets, Working Paper, Université de Paris I, GREQE Marseille, Université de Toulon (1992).
A. Chateauneuf, R. Kast and A. Lapied, Choquet pricing for financial markets with frictions, Working Paper, Université de Paris I, GREQE Marseille, Université de Toulon (1992).
S. H. Chew, An axiomatic generalization of the quasilinear mean and Gini mean with application to decision theory (1989), rewritten version of S. H. Chew, An axiomatization of the rank-dependent quasilinear mean generalizing the Gini mean and the quasilinear mean, Economics Working Paper #156, Johns Hopkins University (1985).
S. Chew and E. Karni, Choquet Expected Utility with finite state space: Commutativity and actindependence, (1992), J. Econ. Theory, to appear.
S. Chew, E. Karni and Z. Safra, Risk aversion in the theory of expected utility with rank dependent preferences, J. Econ. Theory 42 (1987) 370–381.
S. Chew and P. P. Wakker, Generalizing Choquet expected utility by weakening Savage's surething principle, Working Paper, University of California, University of Nijmegen (1991).
G. Choquet, Théorie des capacités, Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) V (1953) 131–295.
C. Dellacherie, Quelques commentaires sur les prolongements de capacités,Séminaire de Probabilités V, Strasbourg, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 191 (Springer, Berlin, 1970).
A. P. Dempster, Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping, Ann. Math. Statist. 38 (1967) 325–339.
D. Denneberg, Distorted probabilities and insurance premiums, Working Paper, University of Bremen (1990).
D. Denneberg, Lectures on non-additive measure and integral, Preprint no. 42, University of Bremen (1992).
J. Dow and S. Werlang, Uncertainty aversion, risk aversion, and the optimal choice of portfolio, Econometrica 60 (1992) 197–204.
R. Dyckherhoff and K. Mosler, Stochastic dominance with nonadditive probabilities, Zeits. Oper. Res. 37 (1993) 319–340.
D. Ellsberg, Risk, ambiguity and the Savage axioms, Quart. J. Econ. 75 (1961) 643–669.
L. G. Epstein, Behaviour under risk: Recent developments in theory and applications, Working Paper, University of Toronto (1990).
L. G. Epstein and T. Wang, Intertemporal asset pricing under Knightian uncertainty, Econometrica 62 (1994) 283–322.
P. C. Fisburn,Nonlinear Preference and Utility Theory (The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1988).
I. Gilboa, Expected utility with purely subjective non-additive probabilities, J. Math. Econ. 16 (1987) 65–88.
I. Gilboa and D. Schmeidler, Additive representations of non-additive measures and the Choquet integral, Working Paper, Northwestern University, Tel Aviv University (1992).
I. Gilboa and D. Schmeidler, Canonical representation of set functions, Working Paper, Northwestern University, Tel Aviv University (1992).
G. H. Greco, Sulla rappresentazione di funzionali mediante integrali, Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 66 (1982) 21–42.
J. R. Green and B. Jullien, Ordinal independence in nonlinear utility theory, J. Risk and Uncertainty 1 (1988) 355–387.
J. Y. Jaffray, Linear utility theory for belief functions, Oper. Res. Lett. 8 (1989) 107–112.
P. Kischka and C. Puppe, Decisions under risk and uncertainty: A survey of recent developments, Zeits. Oper. Res. 36 (1992) 125–147.
Y. Nakamura, Subjective expected utility with non-additive probabilities on finite state spaces, J. Econ. Theory 51 (1990) 346–366.
Y. Nakamura, Rank dependent utility for arbitrary consequence spaces, Working Paper, University of Tsukuba (1991).
Y. Nakamura, Multisymmetric structures and non-expected utility, J. Math. Psychol. 36 (1992) 375–395.
J. Quiggin, A theory of anticipated utility, J. Econ. Behavior and Organization 3 (1982) 323–343.
J. Quiggin and P. P. Wakker, The axiomatic basics of anticipated utility: A clarification, (1992), J. Econ. Theory, to appear.
R. Sarin and P. P. Wakker, A simple axiomatization of nonadditive expected utility, Econometrica 60 (1992) 1255–1272.
L. J. Savage,The Foundations of Statistics (Wiley, New York, 1954; 2nd ed. Dover, New York, 1972).
M. Scarsini, Dominance conditions in non-additive expected utility theory, J. Math. Econ. 21 (1992) 173–184.
D. Schmeidler, Integral representation without additivity, Proc. AMS 97 (1986) 255–261.
D. Schmeidler, Subjective probability and expected utility without additivity, Econometrica 57 (1989) 571–587; first version: Subjective expected utility without additivity, Foerder Institute Working Paper (1982).
U. Segal, Anticipated utility: A measure representation approach, Ann. Oper. Res. 19 (1989) 359–373.
U. Segal, The measure representation: A correction, J. Risk and Uncertainty 6 (1993) 99–107.
G. Shafer,A Mathematical Theory of Evidence (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1976).
L. S. Shapley, Cores of convex games, Int. J. Game Theory 1 (1971) 11–26.
A. Tversky and D. Kahhneman, Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty, J. Risk and Uncertainty 5 (1992) 297–323.
J. von Neumann and O. Morgenstern,Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1947).
M. Yaari, The dual theory of choice under risk, Econometrica 55 (1987) 95–115.
M. Yaari, A controversial proposal concerning inequality measurement, J. Econ. Theory 44 (1988) 381–397.
P. P. Wakker, Continuous subjective expected utility with non-additive probabilities. J. Math. Econ. 18 (1989) 1–27.
P. P. Wakker,Additive Representations of Preferences (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1989).
P. P. Wakker, Under stochastic dominance Choquet-expected utility and anticipated utility are identical, Theory and Decision 29 (1990) 119–132.
P. P. Wakker, Characterizing optimism and pessimism directly through comonotonicity, J. Econ. Theory 52 (1990) 453–463.
P.P. Wakker, Separating marginal utility and probabilistic risk aversion, Theory and Decision 36 (1994) 1–44.
P. P. Wakker and A. Tversky, An axiomatization of cumulative prospect theory, J. Risk and Uncertainty 7 (1993) 147–176.
J. A. Weymark, Generalized Gini inequality indices, Math. Social Sci. 1 (1981) 409–430.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chateauneuf, A. Modeling attitudes towards uncertainty and risk through the use of choquet integral. Ann Oper Res 52, 1–20 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02032158
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02032158