Author
Abstract
Choice theory is a mathematical discipline which studies the problem of choosing a point from a set of points by studying the mathematical properties of maps assigning an outcome to each choice problem in some class of choice problems. A large literature has grown up concerning choice problems in Euclidean spaces. A typical choice problem is then a compact, convex, comprehensive subset of the non-negative orthant of a finite dimensional Euclidean space, containing a strictly positive vector. For such choice problems, Yu (1973) and Freimer and Yu (1976) have introduced a class of solutions obtained by minimizing the distance of the “ideal point”, measured by some norm. The equal loss solution is one such. However neither Yu (1973) nor Freimer and YU (1976), succeeded in characterizing such solutions axiomatically. It was in Chun (1988) that we find a complete axiomatic characterization of the equal loss solution for the first time. A brief glance at the proof of Chun’s theorem, begs the questions, whether there is a simple alternative proof. The purpose of this paper is to provide such a proof, by modifying the technique suggested by Thomson and Lensberg (1989), in their axiomatic characterization of the egalitarian solution. In the later sections of the paper we consider choice problems with variable dimensions and obtain an axiomatic characterization of the equal-loss-choice function using a reduced choice problem property, first invoked in the relevant literature by Peters, Tijs and Zarzuelo (1994). We are thereby able to drop the assumption of Strong Monotonicity with Respect to the Ideal point, which is used in the original characterization.
Suggested Citation
Lahiri Somdeb, 1995.
"The Equal Loss Choice Function Revisited,"
IIMA Working Papers
WP1995-08-01_01355, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
Handle:
RePEc:iim:iimawp:wp01355
Download full text from publisher
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
options:
1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's
web page
whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a
search for a similarly titled item that would be
available.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iim:iimawp:wp01355. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eciimin.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.