Choice without Beliefs
نویسندگان
چکیده
We provide an axiomatic foundation for decision making in a complex environment. We do not assume that the decision maker has complete structural knowledge of the environment. Instead the agent knows the set of actions he can take, he formulates preferences directly on the actions, and chooses according to these preferences. On the basis of experience he modi ̄es these preferences according to a systematic procedure. Our axioms are imposed on this procedure, rather than directly on the choice itself. The axioms consists of a group of natural structural restrictions and a group of independence axioms. Our main result is an axiomatic foundation for a set of simple adaptive learning procedures which include the replicator dynamic.
منابع مشابه
Strategic manipulability without resoluteness or shared beliefs: Gibbard-Satterthwaite generalized
The Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem on the manipulability of socialchoice rules assumes resoluteness: there are no ties, no multi-member choice sets. Generalizations based on a familiar lottery idea allow ties but assume perfectly shared probabilistic beliefs about their resolution. We prove a more straightforward generalization that assumes almost no limit on ties or beliefs about them.
متن کاملBayesian group belief
If a group is modelled as a single Bayesian agent, what should its beliefs be? I propose an axiomatic model that connects group beliefs to beliefs of the group members. The group members may have different information, different prior beliefs, and even different domains (algebras) within which they hold beliefs, accounting for differences in awareness and conceptualisation. As is shown, group b...
متن کاملThe Nature of Belief-Directed Exploratory Choice in Human Decision-Making
In non-stationary environments, there is a conflict between exploiting currently favored options and gaining information by exploring lesser-known options that in the past have proven less rewarding. Optimal decision-making in such tasks requires considering future states of the environment (i.e., planning) and properly updating beliefs about the state of the environment after observing outcome...
متن کاملA dynamic epistemic characterization of backward induction without counterfactuals
The analysis of rational play in dynamic games is usually done within a static framework that specifies a player’s initial beliefs as well as his disposition to revise those beliefs conditional on hypothetical states of information. We suggest a simpler approach, where the rationality of a player’s choice is judged on the basis of the actual beliefs that the player has at the time he has to mak...
متن کاملCOMPARISON OF RELIGIOUS BELIEFS AND SEXUAL SATISFACTION OF WOMEN WITH AND WITHOUT METACOGNITION IN TEHRAN
Background & Aims: The purpose of this study was to compare the religious beliefs and sexual satisfaction of women with and without meta-relationships. Materials & Methods: The research design was causal-comparative. The study population consisted of all women who referred to psychology and psychiatry clinics in Tehran in 1977, who had a history of extra-marital relationships, and women with no...
متن کاملA General Theory for Quantifying Beliefs*
This paper presents conditions under which a person’s beliefs about the occurrence of uncertain events are quantified by a capacity measure, i.e., a nonadditive probability. Additivity of probability is violated in a large number of applications where probabilities are vague or ambiguous due to lack of information. The key feature of the theory presented in this paper is a separation of the der...
متن کامل