ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
We provide two characterizations, one axiomatic and the other neuro-computational, of the dependence of choice probabilities on deadlines, within the widely used softmax representation [ p_{t}left( a,Aright) =dfrac{e^{frac{uleft( aright) }{lambda left( tright) }+alpha left( aright) }}{sum_{bin A}e^{frac{uleft( bright) }{lambda left( tright) }+alpha left( bright) }}% ] where $p_{t}left( a,Aright) $ is the probability that alternative $a$ is selected from the set $A$ of feasible alternatives if $t$ is the time available to decide, $lambda$ is a time dependent noise parameter measuring the unit cost of information, $u$ is a time independent utility function, and $alpha$ is an alternative-specific bias that determines the initial choice probabilities reflecting prior information and memory anchoring. Our axiomatic analysis provides a behavioral foundation of softmax (also known as Multinomial Logit Model when $alpha$ is constant). Our neuro-computational derivation provides a biologically inspired algorithm that may explain the emergence of softmax in choice behavior. Jointly, the two approaches provide a thorough understanding of soft-maximization in terms of internal causes (neurophysiological mechanisms) and external effects (testable implications).
We study multinomial logit bandit with limited adaptivity, where the algorithms change their exploration actions as infrequently as possible when achieving almost optimal minimax regret. We propose two measures of adaptivity: the assortment switching
In the early 1990s, after its Jupiter flyby, the Ulysses spacecraft identified interstellar dust in the solar system. Since then the in-situ dust detector on board Ulysses continuously monitored interstellar grains with masses up to 10e-13 kg, penetr
In this paper, we consider the contextual variant of the MNL-Bandit problem. More specifically, we consider a dynamic set optimization problem, where in every round a decision maker offers a subset (assortment) of products to a consumer, and observes
We propose a theoretical framework under which preference profiles can be meaningfully compared. Specifically, given a finite set of feasible allocations and a preference profile, we first define a ranking vector of an allocation as the vector of all
Inspired by Ramseys theorem for pairs, Rival and Sands proved what we refer to as an inside/outside Ramsey theorem: every infinite graph $G$ contains an infinite subset $H$ such that every vertex of $G$ is adjacent to precisely none, one, or infinite