{"title":"贝叶斯代理的平滑聚合","authors":"Lorenzo Maria Stanca","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3282391","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I study the ex-ante aggregation of preferences of Bayesian agents in a purely subjective framework. Unlike Gilboa et al. (2004), I relax the assumption of Bayesian society while keeping the Pareto condition. Under a simple axiom that relates society’s preference to those of the agents, I obtain an additive separable representation of society’s preference. A strengthening of this axiom leads to a representation that resembles the Smooth Ambiguity Criterion of Klibanoff et al. (2005). I then study the properties of this representation, characterizing when society can be deemed to be ambiguity averse. I then briefly consider applications of this framework to study the Precautionary Principle and treatment choice under ambiguity.","PeriodicalId":10477,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Social Science eJournal","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Smooth Aggregation of Bayesian Agents\",\"authors\":\"Lorenzo Maria Stanca\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3282391\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"I study the ex-ante aggregation of preferences of Bayesian agents in a purely subjective framework. Unlike Gilboa et al. (2004), I relax the assumption of Bayesian society while keeping the Pareto condition. Under a simple axiom that relates society’s preference to those of the agents, I obtain an additive separable representation of society’s preference. A strengthening of this axiom leads to a representation that resembles the Smooth Ambiguity Criterion of Klibanoff et al. (2005). I then study the properties of this representation, characterizing when society can be deemed to be ambiguity averse. I then briefly consider applications of this framework to study the Precautionary Principle and treatment choice under ambiguity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10477,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognitive Social Science eJournal\",\"volume\":\"39 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognitive Social Science eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3282391\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Social Science eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3282391","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
我在一个纯粹主观的框架中研究贝叶斯主体的事前偏好聚合。与Gilboa et al.(2004)不同,我在保持帕累托条件的同时放宽了贝叶斯社会的假设。在一个简单的公理下,将社会偏好与那些行动者的偏好联系起来,我得到了社会偏好的可加性可分离表示。该公理的强化导致了类似于Klibanoff等人(2005)的平滑模糊标准的表示。然后,我研究了这种表征的特性,描述了什么时候社会可以被认为是厌恶模糊性的。然后,我简要地考虑了该框架在研究预防原则和歧义下的治疗选择方面的应用。
I study the ex-ante aggregation of preferences of Bayesian agents in a purely subjective framework. Unlike Gilboa et al. (2004), I relax the assumption of Bayesian society while keeping the Pareto condition. Under a simple axiom that relates society’s preference to those of the agents, I obtain an additive separable representation of society’s preference. A strengthening of this axiom leads to a representation that resembles the Smooth Ambiguity Criterion of Klibanoff et al. (2005). I then study the properties of this representation, characterizing when society can be deemed to be ambiguity averse. I then briefly consider applications of this framework to study the Precautionary Principle and treatment choice under ambiguity.