k***g
发帖数: 7244 | 1 现在的literautre对待uncertainty的方式是actors know that they don't know. 可是
如果发生了states don't know they don't
know的情况，怎把把它formalize到rationalist 的framework 中呢？ | f*****x
发帖数: 545 | 2 you may find savage's book and kreps' notes on choice theory helpful, though i
am not sure. There are a few guys working on this kind stuff, but veyr
theoretical. David Ahn, a phd student, in GSB is working on sth related. you
can try to google it. 【 在 kzeng (。。。) 的大作中提到: 】
是 | k***g
发帖数: 7244 | 3 多谢啊，我在想能不能用这种方式把unanticripated consequence 引入rationalist
framework, 就是说rationality conditioned by belief， 或者说在given belief的情
况下谈论rationality,而unanticipated consequence的原因是belief的错误。。。
i
可
【在 f*****x 的大作中提到】
: you may find savage's book and kreps' notes on choice theory helpful, though i
: am not sure. There are a few guys working on this kind stuff, but veyr
: theoretical. David Ahn, a phd student, in GSB is working on sth related. you
: can try to google it. 【 在 kzeng (。。。) 的大作中提到: 】
: 是
| f*****x
发帖数: 545 | 4 not sure how to distinguish them formally. according to harsanyi's moethod, u
can always assign ur belief to anything could happen. it is difficult to model
unanticipated consequence. have u searched bounded rationality literature or
recent development in behaviour econo? 【 在 kzeng (。。。) 的大作中提到: 】
情
though
you |
|
