= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
timtyler comments on Expected utility without the independence axiom - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (65)
This article had an interesting title so I scanned it - but it lacked an abstract, a conclusion, had lots of maths in it - and I haven't liked most of Stuart's other articles - so I gave up on it early.
The article attempts to show that you don't need the independence axiom to justify using expected utility. So I replaced the independence axiom with another axiom that basically says that very thin distribution is pretty much the same as a guaranteed return.
Then I showed that if you had a lot of "reasonable" lotteries and put them together, you should behave approximately according to expected utility.
There's a lot of maths in it because the result is novel, and therefore has to be firmly justified. I hope to explore non-independent lotteries in future posts, so the foundations need to be solid.