Skip to main content

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to provide a differential geometric framework for the analysis of individual choice under uncertainty. Since this approach is far from standard, we begin by discussing informally how choice can be geometrised, and why we believe the approach has value.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Allais, M. (1952). Fondements d’une theorie positive des choix. Econometric, 40, 257–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amari, S-i. (1984). Differential-geometric methods in statistics. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, C. and Mitchell, A. F. (1981). Rao’s distance measure. Sankya, 43A, 345365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnsdorf, N. O. (1978). Information and exponential families in statistical theory. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D. E. (1982). Regret in decision making under uncertainty. Operations Research, 30, 961–981.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, F. and Scholes, M. (1973). The pricing of options and the evaluation of corporate liabilities. Journal of Political Economy, 81, 637–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, J. and Sarin, R. (1988). Lottery dependent utility. University of California at Los Angeles working paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camerer, C. (1988). An experimental test of several generalised utility theories. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, forthcoming.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cass, D. and Stiglitz, J. (1970). The structure of investor preferences and asset return separability. Journal of Economic Theory, 10, 122–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Centsov, N. N. (1972). Statistical decision rules and optimal inference. Rhode Island: A.M.S.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chew, S. H. (1983). A generalization of the quasi-linear mean, etc. Econometrica, 51, 1065–1092.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chew, S. H. and Macrimmon, K. (1979). Alpha-nu utility theory, etc. University of British Columbia working paper No. 686.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choquet-Bruhat, Y., Dewitt-Morette, C. and Dallard-Bleik, M. (1977). Analysis, manifolds and physics. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawid, A. F. (1975). Discussion to Efron’s paper. Annual Statistics, 3, 1231–1234. Debreu, G. (1959). Theory of value. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dekel, E. (1987). Asset demands without the independence axiom. University of California at Berkeley mimeograph 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Efron, B. (1975). Defining the curvature of a statistical problem. Annual Statistics, 3, 1189–1242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grinblatt, M. and Johnson, H. (1988). A put option paradox. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishburn, P. C. (1984). SSB utility theory, etc. Mathematical Social Sciences, 8, 253–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardiner, C. W. (1985). Handbook of stochastic methods. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. and Twersky, A. (1979). Pospect theory. Econometrica, 47, 263–291. Kramers, H. A. (1940). Physica, 7, 284–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomes, G. and Sugden, R. (1986). Disappointment and dynamic choice under uncertainty. Review of Economic Studies, 53, 271–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loomes, G. and Sugden, R. (1982). Regret theory. Economic Journal, 92, 805–824. Lighthill, M. J. (1978). Fourier analysis and generalised functions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machina, M. (1984). The economic theory of individual behavior towards risk, etc. Working paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machina. M. (1982). Expected utility analysis without the independence axiom. Econometrica, 50, 277–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marschak, J. (1950). Rational behavior, uncertain prospects, and measurable utility. Econometrica, 18, 111–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz, H. (1959). Portfolio selection. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moyal, J. E. (1949). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 11, 151–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pawula, R. F. (1967). Approximation of the linear Boltzmann equation by the Fokker-Planck equation. Physical Review, 162, 186–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfanzagl, J. (1982). Contributions of a general asymptotic statistical theory. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Quiggin, J. (1982). A theory of anticipated utility. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organisations, 3, 323–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, C. R. (1945). Information and accuracy. Bulletin of the Calcutta Mathematical Society, 37, 81–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roell, A. (1985). Risk aversion in Yaari’s model. L.S. E. mimeograph No. 1–16. Ross, S. (1978). Mutual fund separation in financial theory. Journal of Economic Theory, 17, 254–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, T. (1988A). Risk aversion and asset diversification for general preferences. Santa Clara University mimeograph.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, T. (1988B). Schwartz distributions resolve the put paradox. Santa Clara University mimeograph.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, T. (1988C). Tricks with Engel curves. Santa Clara University mimeograph.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, T. (1988D). Continuous time portfolio theory and the Schwartz-Sobolev theory of distributions. Operations Research Letters, 7, 159–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, P. A. (1965). Rational theory of warrant pricing. Industrial Management Review, 6, 13–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, P. A. (1983). Foundations of economic analysis: Enlarged edition. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sato, R. (1981). Theory of technical change and economic invariance. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sato, R. and Ramachandran, R. (1989). Symmetry and conservation: An introduction. Symmetry and conservation laws: With applications to economics and finance. Boston: Klewer Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spivak, M. (1977). A comprehensive introduction to differential geometry. Boston: Publish or Perish Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. and Camerer, C. (1987). Recent developments in modelling preferences under risk O. R. Spectrum9, 129–151

    Google Scholar 

  • Yaari. (1987). The dual theory of choice under risk. Econometrica, 55, 95–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1990 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Russell, T. (1990). Choice as Geometry. In: Sato, R., Ramachandran, R.V. (eds) Conservation Laws and Symmetry: Applications to Economics and Finance. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1145-6_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1145-6_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-5786-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-1145-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics