Skip to main content
Log in

Limit cycles in local preference optimization

  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We consider the problem of a rational consumer who does nota priori know what his optimal feasible consumption bundle is, but attempts to find it by continuously moving in a direction of increasing preferences, starting with an arbitrary bundle. We show that this process is only then guaranteed to lead to the consumption optimum whena the consumer preferences are transitive; and/orb the consumer follows in each point the exact direction of fastest preference increase (that is in the integrable case: the utility gradient). If this is not the case, there may exist limit cycles to which the consumer may get attracted, thus never reaching his optimum.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. N. Al-Najjar, Non-transitive smooth preferences, Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Economics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  2. A. Takayama,Mathematical Economics (The Dryden Press, Hindsdale, Illinois, 1974).

    Google Scholar 

  3. G. Debreu, Smooth preferences, Econometrica 40(1972)603–615.

    Google Scholar 

  4. A. Tversky, Intransitivity of preferences, Psychol. Rev. 76(1969)31–48.

    Google Scholar 

  5. P. Fishburn, Nontransitive preferences in decision theory, J. Risk and Uncertainty 4(1991)113–134.

    Google Scholar 

  6. H. Sonnenschein, Demand theory without transitive preferences, with applications to the theory of competitive equilibrium, in:Preferences, Utility, and Demand: A Minnesota Symposium, ed. J. Chipman, L. Hurwicz, M. Richter and H. Sonnenschein (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York-Chicago-San Francisco-Atlanta, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  7. D. Katzner, Demand and exchange analysis in the absence of integrability conditions, in:Preferences, Utility, and Demand: A Minnesota Symposium, ed. J. Chipman, L. Hurwicz, M Richter and H. Sonnenschein (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York-Chicago-San Francisco-Atlanta, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  8. W. Shafer, The nontransitive consumer, Econometrica 42(1974)913–920.

    Google Scholar 

  9. T. Kim and M. Richter, Nontransitive-nontotal consumer theory, J. Econ. Theory 38(1986)324–363.

    Google Scholar 

  10. L. Hurwicz and M. Richter, An integrability condition with applications to utility theory and thermodynamics, J. Math. Econ. 6(1979)7–14.

    Google Scholar 

  11. D.K. Arrowsmith and C.M. Place,An Introduction to Dynamical Systems (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge-New York-Melbourne, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  12. W. Nef,Linear Algebra (Dover, New York, 1988).

    Google Scholar 

  13. D. Gale, A note on revealed preference, Economica, N.S. 27(1960)348–354.

    Google Scholar 

  14. P.A. Samuelson, The problem of integrability in utility theory, Economica, N.S. 17(1950)335–385.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This note is dedicated to Yves Richelle, the ever-cycling economist.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Deissenberg, C. Limit cycles in local preference optimization. Ann Oper Res 37, 125–140 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02071052

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02071052

Keywords