118 research outputs found

    Utilitarianism with and without expected utility

    Get PDF
    We give two social aggregation theorems under conditions of risk, one for constant population cases, the other an extension to variable populations. Intra and interpersonal welfare comparisons are encoded in a single ‘individual preorder’. The theorems give axioms that uniquely determine a social preorder in terms of this individual preorder. The social preorders described by these theorems have features that may be considered characteristic of Harsanyi-style utilitarianism, such as indifference to ex ante and ex post equality. However, the theorems are also consistent with the rejection of all of the expected utility axioms, completeness, continuity, and independence, at both the individual and social levels. In that sense, expected utility is inessential to Harsanyi-style utilitarianism. In fact, the variable population theorem imposes only a mild constraint on the individual preorder, while the constant population theorem imposes no constraint at all. We then derive further results under the assumption of our basic axioms. First, the individual preorder satisfies the main expected utility axiom of strong independence if and only if the social preorder has a vector-valued expected total utility representation, covering Harsanyi’s utilitarian theorem as a special case. Second, stronger utilitarian-friendly assumptions, like Pareto or strong separability, are essentially equivalent to strong independence. Third, if the individual preorder satisfies a ‘local expected utility’ condition popular in non-expected utility theory, then the social preorder has a ‘local expected total utility’ representation. Fourth, a wide range of non-expected utility theories nevertheless lead to social preorders of outcomes that have been seen as canonically egalitarian, such as rank-dependent social preorders. Although our aggregation theorems are stated under conditions of risk, they are valid in more general frameworks for representing uncertainty or ambiguity

    Loop models, random matrices and planar algebras

    Full text link
    We define matrix models that converge to the generating functions of a wide variety of loop models with fugacity taken in sets with an accumulation point. The latter can also be seen as moments of a non-commutative law on a subfactor planar algebra. We apply this construction to compute the generating functions of the Potts model on a random planar map

    Fast hashing with Strong Concentration Bounds

    Full text link
    Previous work on tabulation hashing by Patrascu and Thorup from STOC'11 on simple tabulation and from SODA'13 on twisted tabulation offered Chernoff-style concentration bounds on hash based sums, e.g., the number of balls/keys hashing to a given bin, but under some quite severe restrictions on the expected values of these sums. The basic idea in tabulation hashing is to view a key as consisting of c=O(1)c=O(1) characters, e.g., a 64-bit key as c=8c=8 characters of 8-bits. The character domain Σ\Sigma should be small enough that character tables of size ∣Σ∣|\Sigma| fit in fast cache. The schemes then use O(1)O(1) tables of this size, so the space of tabulation hashing is O(∣Σ∣)O(|\Sigma|). However, the concentration bounds by Patrascu and Thorup only apply if the expected sums are ≪∣Σ∣\ll |\Sigma|. To see the problem, consider the very simple case where we use tabulation hashing to throw nn balls into mm bins and want to analyse the number of balls in a given bin. With their concentration bounds, we are fine if n=mn=m, for then the expected value is 11. However, if m=2m=2, as when tossing nn unbiased coins, the expected value n/2n/2 is ≫∣Σ∣\gg |\Sigma| for large data sets, e.g., data sets that do not fit in fast cache. To handle expectations that go beyond the limits of our small space, we need a much more advanced analysis of simple tabulation, plus a new tabulation technique that we call \emph{tabulation-permutation} hashing which is at most twice as slow as simple tabulation. No other hashing scheme of comparable speed offers similar Chernoff-style concentration bounds.Comment: 54 pages, 3 figures. An extended abstract appeared at the 52nd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC20
    • …
    corecore