Content deleted Content added
m Dating maintenance tags: {{Self-published inline}} {{Pn}} {{Full}} |
Citation bot (talk | contribs) Alter: template type, pages. Add: url, jstor, arxiv, isbn, pages, volume, date, series, title, chapter, s2cid, authors 1-2. Removed parameters. Some additions/deletions were parameter name changes. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by Chris Capoccia | #UCB_toolbar |
||
Line 1:
In [[economics]] and [[psychology]], a '''random utility model''',<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Manski |first1=Charles F. |title=The structure of random utility models |journal=Theory and Decision |date=July 1977 |volume=8 |issue=3 |pages=229–254 |id={{ProQuest|1303217712}} |doi=10.1007/BF00133443 |s2cid=120718598 }}</ref><ref>{{cite
== Background ==
A basic assumption in classic economics is that the choices of a rational person choices are guided by a [[Preference (economics)|preference relation]], which can usually be described by a [[utility function]]. When faced with several alternatives, the person will choose the alternative with the highest utility. The utility function is not visible; however, by observing the choices made by the person, we can "reverse-engineer" his utility function. This is the goal of [[revealed preference]] theory.
In practice, however, people are not rational. Ample empirical evidence shows that, when faced with the same set of alternatives, people may make different choices.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Camerer |first1=Colin F. |title=An experimental test of several generalized utility theories |journal=Journal of Risk and Uncertainty |date=April 1989 |volume=2 |issue=1 |pages=61–104 |doi=10.1007/BF00055711 |s2cid=154335530 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Starmer |first1=Chris |last2=Sugden |first2=Robert |title=Probability and juxtaposition effects: An experimental investigation of the common ratio effect |journal=Journal of Risk and Uncertainty |date=June 1989 |volume=2 |issue=2 |pages=159–178 |doi=10.1007/BF00056135 |s2cid=153567599 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Hey |first1=John D. |last2=Orme |first2=Chris |title=Investigating Generalizations of Expected Utility Theory Using Experimental Data |journal=Econometrica |date=1994 |volume=62 |issue=6 |pages=1291–1326 |doi=10.2307/2951750 |jstor=2951750 |s2cid=120069179 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Wu |first1=George |title=An empirical test of ordinal independence |journal=Journal of Risk and Uncertainty |date=1994 |volume=9 |issue=1 |pages=39–60 |doi=10.1007/BF01073402 |s2cid=153558846 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ballinger |first1=T. Parker |last2=Wilcox |first2=Nathaniel T. |title=Decisions, Error and Heterogeneity |journal=The Economic Journal |date=July 1997 |volume=107 |issue=443 |pages=1090–1105 |doi=10.1111/j.1468-0297.1997.tb00009.x |s2cid=153823510 }}</ref> To an outside observer, their choices may appear random.
One way to model this behavior is called '''stochastic rationality'''. It is assumed that each agent has an unobserved ''state'', which can be considered a random variable. Given that state, the agent behaves rationally. In other words: each agent has, not a single preference-relation, but a [[Probability distribution|''distribution'']] over preference-relations (or utility functions).
== The representation problem ==
Block and [[Jacob Marschak|Marschak]]<ref name=":1">{{cite
[[Jean-Claude Falmagne|Falmagne]]<ref name=":2">{{cite journal |last1=Falmagne |first1=J.C. |title=A representation theorem for finite random scale systems |journal=Journal of Mathematical Psychology |date=August 1978 |volume=18 |issue=1 |pages=52–72 |doi=10.1016/0022-2496(78)90048-2 }}</ref> solved this problem for the case in which the set of alternatives is finite: he proved that a probability distribution exists iff a set of polynomials derived from the choice-probabilities, denoted ''Block-Marschak polynomials,'' are nonnegative. His solution is constructive, and provides an algorithm for computing the distribution.
Line 18:
Block and [[Jacob Marschak|Marschak]]<ref name=":1" /> proved that, when there are at most 3 alternatives, the random utility model is unique ("identified"); however, when there are 4 or more alternatives, the model may be non-unique.<ref name=":3" /> For example,<ref>https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/tomasz/files/lisbon32-post.pdf{{full|date=November 2023}}{{self-published inline|date=November 2023}}</ref> we can compute the probability that the agent prefers w to x (w>x), and the probability that y>z, but may not be able to know the probability that both w>x and y>z. There are even distributions with disjoint supports, which induce the same set of choice probabilities.
Some conditions for uniqueness were given by [[Jean-Claude Falmagne|Falmagne]].<ref name=":2" /> Turansick<ref name=":0">{{cite journal |last1=Turansick |first1=Christopher |title=Identification in the random utility model |journal=Journal of Economic Theory |date=July 2022 |volume=203 |pages=105489 |doi=10.1016/j.jet.2022.105489 |arxiv=2102.05570 |s2cid=231861383 }}</ref> presents two characterizations for the existence of a unique random utility representation.
== Models ==
There are various random utility models, which differ in the assumptions on the probability distributions of the agent's utility, A popular random utility model was developed by Luce<ref>{{cite book |last1=Luce |first1=R. Duncan |title=Individual Choice Behavior: A Theoretical Analysis |date=2012 |publisher=Courier Corporation |isbn=978-0-486-15339-1 }}{{pn|date=November 2023}}</ref> and Plackett.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Plackett |first1=R. L. |title=The Analysis of Permutations |journal=Applied Statistics |date=1975 |volume=24 |issue=2 |pages=
The Plackett-Luce model was applied in [[econometrics]],<ref>{{cite book |last1=McFadden |first1=Daniel |chapter=Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior |pages=105–142 |editor1-last=Zarembka |editor1-first=Paul |title=Frontiers in Econometrics |date=1974 |publisher=Academic Press |isbn=978-0-12-776150-3 }}</ref> for example, to analyze automobile prices in [[market equilibrium]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Berry |first1=Steven |last2=Levinsohn |first2=James |last3=Pakes |first3=Ariel |title=Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium |journal=Econometrica |date=1995 |volume=63 |issue=4 |pages=841–890 |doi=10.2307/2171802 |jstor=2171802 }}</ref> It was also applied in [[Machine learning in earth sciences|machine learning]] and [[information retrieval]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Liu |first1=Tie-Yan |title=Learning to Rank for Information Retrieval |journal=Foundations and Trends® in Information Retrieval |date=2007 |volume=3 |issue=3 |pages=225–331 |doi=10.1561/1500000016 }}</ref> It was also applied in [[Social choice theory|social choice]], to analyze an opinion poll conducted during the [[1997 Irish presidential election|Irish presidential election]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Gormley |first1=Isobel Claire |last2=Murphy |first2=Thomas Brendan |title=A grade of membership model for rank data |journal=Bayesian Analysis |date=June 2009 |volume=4 |issue=2 |doi=10.1214/09-BA410 |s2cid=53559452 }}</ref> Efficient methods for [[expectation-maximization]] and [[Expectation propagation]] exist for the Plackett-Luce model.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Caron |first1=François |last2=Doucet |first2=Arnaud |title=Efficient Bayesian Inference for Generalized Bradley–Terry Models |journal=Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics |date=January 2012 |volume=21 |issue=1 |pages=174–196 |doi=10.1080/10618600.2012.638220 |arxiv=1011.1761 |s2cid=42955305 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Hunter |first1=David R. |title=MM algorithms for generalized Bradley-Terry models |journal=The Annals of Statistics |date=February 2004 |volume=32 |issue=1 |doi=10.1214/aos/1079120141 }}</ref><ref>{{cite
Azari, [[David C. Parkes|Parkes]] and Xia<ref name=":4">{{Cite journal |
== Application to social choice ==
Line 46:
* ''Combining Revealed Preferences and Stated Preferences:'' to combine advantages of these two data types.
Blavatzkyy<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Blavatskyy |first1=Pavlo R. |title=Stochastic utility theorem |journal=Journal of Mathematical Economics |date=December 2008 |volume=44 |issue=11 |pages=1049–1056 |doi=10.1016/j.jmateco.2007.12.005 |url=http://www.econ.uzh.ch/static/wp_iew/iewwp311.pdf }}</ref> studies stochastic utility theory based on choices between lotteries. The input is a set of ''choice probabilities'', which indicate the likelihood that the agent choose one lottery over the other. The desired output is a ''stochastic utility representation'': a writing of the choice probabilities as a non-decreasing function of the difference in expected utilities of the lotteries. He proves that choice probabilities admit a stochastic utility representation iff they are complete, strongly transitive, continuous, independent of common consequences, and interchangeable.
== References ==
|