Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Preferences Representable by a Lower Expectation: Some Characterizations

  • Published:
Theory and Decision Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We propose two different characterizations for preference relations representable by lower (upper) expectations with the aim of removing either fair price or completeness requirements. Moreover, we give an explicit characterization for comparative degrees of belief on a finite algebra of events representable by lower probabilities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anscombe F. and Aumann R. (1963). A definition of subjective probability. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 34: 199–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger J.O. (1990). Robust Bayesian analysis: sensitivity to the prior. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 25: 303–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger J.O. (1985). Statistical Decision Theory and Bayesian Analysis. Springer-Verlag, New york

    Google Scholar 

  • Buehler R.J. (1976). Coherent preferences. The Annals of Statistics 4: 1051–1064

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capotorti A., Coletti G. and Vantaggi B. (1998). Non additive ordinal relations representable by lower or upper probabilities. Kybernetika 34(1): 79–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Castagnoli E., Maccheroni F. and Marinacci M. (2004). Choquet insurance pricing: a caveat. Mathematical Finance 14(3): 481–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chateauneuf A. (1988a). Uncertainty aversion and risk aversion in models with nonadditive probabilities. In: Munier, B.R. (eds) Risk, Decision and Rationality, pp 615–629. Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Chateauneuf A. (1988b). Decomposable capacities, distorted probabilities and concave capacities. Mathematical Social Sciences 31: 19–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chateauneuf A. (1991). On the use of capacities in modeling uncertainty aversion and risk aversion. Journal of Mathematical Economics 20: 343–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chateauneuf A., Kast R. and Lapied A. (1996). Choquet pricing for financial markets. Mathematical Finance 6(3): 323–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coletti G. (1990). Coherent qualitative probability. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 34: 297–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coletti G. and Vantaggi B. (2006). Representability of ordinal relations on a set of conditional events. Theory and Decision 60: 137–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Finetti B. (1931). Sul significato soggettivo della probabilità. Fundamenta Mathematicae 17: 298–329

    Google Scholar 

  • de Finetti, B. (1970), Teoria della Probabilità. Torino: Einaudi (Engl. transl. (1974) Theory of probability, London: Wiley & Sons).

  • Diecidue E. and Maccheroni F. (2003). Coherence without additivity. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 47: 166–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diecidue E. and Wakker P.P. (2002). Dutch books: Avoiding strategic and dynamic complications and a comonotonic extension. Mathematical Social Sciences 43: 135–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dow J. and Werlang S. (1992). Excess volatility of stock prices and Knightian uncertainty. European Economic Review 36: 631–638

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dubois D., Prade H. and Sabbadin R. (2001). Decision-theoretic foundations of qualitative possibility theory. European Journal of Operational Research 128: 459–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellsberg D. (1961). Risk, ambiguity and the Savage axioms. Quarterly Journal of Economics 75: 643–669

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein L.G. and Zhang J. (2001). Subjective probabilities on subjectively unambigous events. Econometrica 69: 265–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenchel W. (1951). Convex Cones Sets and Functions. Lectures at Princeton University, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilboa I. and Schmeidler D. (1989). Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior. Journal of Mathematical Economics 18: 141–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giron F.J. and Rios S. (1980). Quasi-Bayesian behaviour: A more realistic approach to decision making?. In: Bernardo, J.M., DeGroot, J.H., Lindley, D.V. and Smith, A.F.M. (eds) Bayesian Statistics, pp 17–38. University Press, Valencia, Spain

    Google Scholar 

  • Girotto B. and Holzer S. (2003). Representing complete and incomplete subjective linear preferences on random numbers. Decisions in Economics and Finance 26(2): 129–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber P.J. (1981). Robust Statistics. John Wiley and Sons, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraft C., Pratt J. and Seidenberg A. (1959). Intuitive probability on finite sets. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 30: 408–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luce R.D. (2000). Utility of Gains and Losses: Measurement-Theoretical and Experimental Approaches. Lawerence Erlbaum, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Machina M.J. and Schmeidler D. (1995). Bayes without Bernoulli: simple conditions for probabilistically sophisticated choice. Journal of Economic Theory 67(1): 106–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nau R.F. (2006). The shape of incomplete preferences. The Annals of Statistics 34(5): 2430–2448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nau R.F. and McCardle K.F. (1990). Coherent behavior in noncooperative games. Journal of Economic Theory 50: 424–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nehring K. (2000). A theory of rational choice under ignorance. Theory and Decision 48: 205–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuefeind W. and Trockel W. (1995). Continuous linear representability of binary relations. Economic Theory 6: 351–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quiggin J. (1981). Risk perception and risk aversion among Australian farmers. Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics 25: 160–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Regoli, G. (1996), Comparative probability and robustness, in Berger, J.O. Betro, B. Moreno, E. Pericchi, L.R. Ruggeri, F. Salinetti, G. and Wasserman L. (eds.) Bayesian Robustness, in IMS Lecture notes, Monograph Series, 29: 327–336.

  • Savage, L.J. (1954), The Foundations of Statistics New York: John Wiley and Sons. Revised and Enlarged Edition. New York: Dover Publications, 1972.

  • Schmeidler, D. (1986), Integral representation without additivity, In Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society 97, 255–261.

  • Schmeidler D. (1989). Subjective probability and expected utility without additivity. Econometrica 57: 571–587

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidenfeld T., Schervish M.J. and Kadane J.B. (1995). A representation of partially ordered preferences. The Annals of Statistics 23(6): 2168–2217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A. and Kahneman D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5: 297–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varian H.R. (1987). The arbitrage principle in financial economics. Journal of Economic Perspectives 1(2): 55–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakker P. (1989). Continuous subjective expected utility with non-additive probabilities. Journal of Mathematical Economics 18: 1–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wakker P.P., Thaler R.H. and Tversky A. (1997). Probabilistic insurance. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 15: 7–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walley P. (1991). Statistical Reasoning with Imprecise Probabilities. Chapman and Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang S. (1996). Premium calculation by transforming the layer premium density. ASTIN Bulletin 26: 71–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang S., Young V. and Panjer H. (1997). Axiomatic characterization of insurance prices. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 21: 173–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang S. (2000). A class of distortion operators for pricing financial and insurance risks. The Journal of Risk and Insurance 67: 15–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, L. (1992), Recent methodological advances in robust Bayesian inference, Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior, in Bernardo, J.M. Berger, J.O. Dawid, A.P. and Smith A.F.M. (eds.) Bayesian Statistics, 4; pp. 483–502.

  • Williams, P.M. (1975), Notes on conditional previsions, School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences. The University of Sussex, bussex.

  • Wong S.K.M., Yao Y.Y., Bollmann P. and Burger H.C. (1991). Axiomatization of qualitative belief structure. IEEE Transaction on Systems Man Cybernetics 21: 726–734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yaari M. (1969). Some remarks on measures of risk aversion and on their uses. Journal of Economic Theory 1: 315–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dip. Matematica e Informatica, Università di Perugia, via Vanvitelli, 06123, Perugia, Italy

    Andrea Capotorti & Giulianella Coletti

  2. Dip. Metodi e Modelli Matematici, Università “La Sapienza” Rome, via Scarpa 16, 00161, Rome, Italy

    Barbara Vantaggi

Authors
  1. Andrea Capotorti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Giulianella Coletti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Barbara Vantaggi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Barbara Vantaggi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Capotorti, A., Coletti, G. & Vantaggi, B. Preferences Representable by a Lower Expectation: Some Characterizations. Theor Decis 64, 119–146 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-007-9052-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-007-9052-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation