Decision Making Under Uncertainty
14.123 Microeconomic Theory III Muha met Yildiz
Risk v. uncertainty
1. Risk = DM has to choo se from alternatives
whose consequences are unknown
But the prob ability of each consequence is given
2. Uncertainty = DM has to choose from alternatives
whose consequences are unknown
the probability of conseq uences is n o t given
DM has to f o rm his own beliefs
3. Von Neumann- Mor genstern: Ri sk
4. Goal:
1. Conve r t unc ertainty to risk by formal izing and eliciting belief s
2. Apply Von Neuman n Mo rgenstern a nalysis
Decision Making Under Risk – S ummary
C = Finit e set of consequences
X = P = lotteries (prob. distributions on C )
Expected Utility Representation:
p f q u ( c ) p ( c ) u ( c ) q ( c )
c C
c C
Theorem: EU Representation continuous preference relation with Independence Axiom :
ap +(1- a ) r ≽ aq +(1- a ) r p ≽ q .
Road map
1. Acts, States, Consequences
2. Expected Utility Maximiza tion – R epresentation
3. Sure- T hing Principl e
4. Conditional Preferences
5. Eliciting Qualitative Beliefs
6. Representing Qualitative Beliefs with Probability
7. Expected Utility Maximiza tion – C haracterization
8. Anscombe & Aumann trick: use indifference between uncertain and risky events
Model
C = Finit e set of c onsequence s
S = A set of st at e s (uncountable)
Act: A mapping f : S → C
X = F := C S
DM cares about consequences, chooses an act, without knowing the state
E x ampl e: Should I take my umbrella?
E x ampl e: A game from a player’s point of view
Expected-Utility Representation
≽ = a relation on F
Expected-Utility Representation :
A probabil i ty distribution p on S with expectation E
A VNM utility function u : C → R such that
f ≽ g U ( f ) ≡ E [ u ◦ f ] ≥ E [ u ◦ g ] ≡ U ( g )
Nec e ssa ry Cond itio ns:
P1 : ≽ is a preference relation
Sure-Thing Principle
If
f ≽ g wh en DM kno w s B S occurs,
f ≽ g wh en DM kno w s S\B occurs,
Then f ≽ g
when DM doesn’t know whether B occurs or not.
P2 : Let f , f ′ , g , g ′ and B be such that
f ( s ) = f ′ ( s ) and g ( s ) = g ′ ( s ) at each s B
f ( s ) = g ( s ) and f ′ ( s ) = g ′ ( s ) at each s S\B . Then, f ≽ g f ′ ≽ g ′ .
Sure-Thing Principle – P icture
C
B
S\B
S
ST P
Conditional Preference
For any acts f and h and e v ent B ,
f
h
f s if s B
| B
s
h ( s ) otherwise
Definition : f ≽ g given B if f f | B ≽ g | B .
h h
Sure-Thing Principle = conditio nal pr eference is well-defined
Informal Sur e -Thing Prin cip l e, formally:
f ≽ g given B : f | B ≽ g | B .
f f
f ≽ g given S \ B : f | S \ B ≽ g | S \ B .
g
g
Trans i tivity: f = f | f ≽ g | f = f | S \ g ≽ g | S \ g = g .
B B B
B
B is null f ~ g given B for all f , g F.
P3: For any x , x ′ C , f , f ′ F with f ≡ x a nd f ′≡ x ′ , and an y non-null B,
f ≽ f ′ given B x ≽ x ′ .
ST PP
Eliciting Beliefs
For an y A S and x , x ′ C , define f A x,x ’ by
f
x , x '
A
s
x
x ' otherwise
if s A
Definition: For any A , B S ,
A ≽ B f A x,x ’ ≽ f B x,x ’
for some x , x ′ C with x ≻ x ′ .
A ≽ B means A is at least as likel y as B .
P4: There exist x , x ′ C such t hat x ≻ x ′ .
P5: For all A , B S , x , x ′ , y , y ′ C with x ≻ x ′ and y ≻ y ′ ,
f A x,x ’ ≽ f B x,x ’ f A y,y ’ ≽ f B y,y ’ .
Qualitative Probability
Definition: A r e la t i o n ≽ between the events is said to b e a qualit ative probability iff
1. ≽ is complete and transitive;
2. for any B , C , D S with B ∩ D = C ∩ D = ∅ , B ≽ C B D ≽ C D ;
3. B ≽∅ for each B S , and S ≻∅ .
Fact: “A t least as likely as” r elation above is a qualitative probability relation.
Quantifying qualitative probability
For any probability measure p and relation ≽ on events, p is a probability r epresentation of ≽ iff
B ≽ C p ( B ) ≥ p ( C ) B , C S .
If ≽ has a probability representation, then ≽ is a qualitative probability.
S is infinitely divisible under ≽ iff n , S has a partition
{ D 1 1 , …, D n n } s uch that D 1 1 ~ … ~ D n n .
P6: For a n y x C , g , h F with g ≻ h , S has a partition
{ D ¹,…, D ⁿ } s.t.
g ≻ h i x and g i x ≻ h
for all i ≤ n w h e r e h i x ( s ) = x if s D i and h (s) otherwise.
P6 implies that S is infinitely divisible under ≽ .
Probability Representation
Theor em: Under P1- P 6, ≽ has a unique probability representation p .
Proof:
For any event B and n , define
k ( n , B ) = max { r | B ≽ D 1 1 … D n r }
Define p ( B ) = lim n k ( n , B )/2 n .
B ≽ C k ( n , B ) ≥ k ( n , C ) n p ( B ) ≥ p ( C ).
P6’: If B ≻ C , S has a partition { D ¹,…, D ⁿ } s.t. B ≻ C
D i for each i ≤ n .
B ≻ C p ( B ) > p ( C ).
Uniqueness: k ( n , B )/2 n ≤ p ′ ( B ) < ( k ( n , B )+1 ) /2 ⁿ
Expected Utility Maximization – Characterization
Theorem: Assume that C is finite. Under P1-P6, there exist a utility functio n u : C → R and a probabilit y measure p on S such that f , g F ,
M IT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu
1 4.123 Microeconomic Theory III
Spring 2010
For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms .