Abstract
Decision theory can be used to test the logic of decision making—one may ask whether a given set of decisions can be justified by a decision‐theoretic model. Indeed, in principal–agent settings, such justifications may be required—a manager of an investment fund may be asked what beliefs she used when valuing assets and a government may be asked whether a portfolio of rules and regulations is coherent. In this paper we ask which collections of uncertain‐act evaluations can be simultaneously justified under the maxmin expected utility criterion by a single set of probabilities. We draw connections to the fundamental theorem of finance (for the special case of a Bayesian agent) and revealed‐preference results.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
