We Hold These Truths not to be Self-evident, Part 2: Strong and simple

Rolf Poulsen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.54946/wilm.11099

2023-03-01

Wilmott

Abstract:Continuing with non-self-evident results from quantitative finance. After a short detour into Russian 19th century literature, we look at some of my favorite examples of simple arguments with strong consequences: Carry, parity, convexity, and sufficiency.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Deflationism And The Invisible Power Of Truth

andrea strollo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-8361.12044

2013-01-01

dialectica

Abstract:In recent decades deflationary theories of truth have been challenged with a technical argument based on the notion of conservativeness. In this paper, I shall stress that conservative extensions of theories and expandability of their models are not equivalent notions. Then, I shall argue that the deflationary thesis of the unsubstantiality of truth is better understood as leveraging on the stronger notion of expandability of models. Once expandability is involved in the argument, some notable consequences follow: the strategy proposed by Hartry Field in response to the conservativeness objection is strongly undermined and even simpler proposals (such as theories based on standard t-sentences) are shown to be quite problematical.
Hard Proofs and Good Reasons

Simon DeDeo

2024-10-12

Abstract:Practicing mathematicians often assume that mathematical claims, when they are true, have good reasons to be true. Such a state of affairs is "unreasonable", in Wigner's sense, because basic results in computational complexity suggest that there are a large number of theorems that have only exponentially-long proofs, and such proofs can not serve as good reasons for the truths of what they establish. Either mathematicians are adept at encountering only the reasonable truths, or what mathematicians take to be good reasons do not always lead to equivalently good proofs. Both resolutions raise new problems: either, how it is that we come to care about the reasonable truths before we have any inkling of how they might be proved, or why there should be good reasons, beyond those of deductive proof, for the truth of mathematical statements. Taking this dilemma seriously provides a new way to make sense of the unstable ontologies found in contemporary mathematics, and new ways to understand how non-human, but intelligent, systems might found new mathematics on inhuman "alien" lemmas.

History and Overview
On Weak Values and Feynman's Blind Alley

Dmitri Sokolovski

2023-12-12

Abstract:Feynman famously recommended accepting the basic principles of quantum mechanics without trying to guess the machinery behind the law. One of the corollaries of the Uncertainty Principle is that the knowledge of probability amplitudes does not allow one to make meaningful statements about the past of an unobserved quantum system. A particular type of reasoning, based on weak values, appears to do just that. Has Feynman been proven wrong by the more recent developments? Most likely not.

Quantum Physics
A Simple Proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Asset Pricing

Keith A. Lewis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1912.01091

2019-12-03

Abstract:A simple statement and accessible proof of a version of the Fundamental Theorem of Asset Pricing in discrete time is provided. Careful distinction is made between prices and cash flows in order to provide uniform treatment of all instruments. There is no need for a ``real-world'' measure in order to specify a model for derivative securities, one simply specifies an arbitrage free model, tunes it to market data, and gets down to the business of pricing, hedging, and managing the risk of derivative securities.

Mathematical Finance
Explaining Arguments' Strength: Unveiling the Role of Attacks and Supports (Technical Report)

Xiang Yin,Potyka Nico,Francesca Toni

2024-05-11

Abstract:Quantitatively explaining the strength of arguments under gradual semantics has recently received increasing attention. Specifically, several works in the literature provide quantitative explanations by computing the attribution scores of arguments. These works disregard the importance of attacks and supports, even though they play an essential role when explaining arguments' strength. In this paper, we propose a novel theory of Relation Attribution Explanations (RAEs), adapting Shapley values from game theory to offer fine-grained insights into the role of attacks and supports in quantitative bipolar argumentation towards obtaining the arguments' strength. We show that RAEs satisfy several desirable properties. We also propose a probabilistic algorithm to approximate RAEs efficiently. Finally, we show the application value of RAEs in fraud detection and large language models case studies.

Artificial Intelligence
The inversion paradox, and classification of fairness notions

Uriel Feige

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2311.16770

2023-11-28

Computer Science and Game Theory

Abstract:Several different fairness notions have been introduced in the context of fair allocation of goods. In this manuscript, we compare between some fairness notions that are used in settings in which agents have arbitrary (perhaps unequal) entitlements to the goods. This includes the proportional share, the anyprice share, the weighted maximin share, weighted envy freeness, maximum weight Nash social welfare and competitive equilibrium. We perform this comparison in two settings, that of a divisible homogeneous good and arbitrary valuations, and that of indivisible goods and additive valuations. Different fairness notions are not always compatible with each other, and might dictate selecting different allocations. The purpose of our work is to clarify various properties of fairness notions, so as to allow, when needed, to make an educated choice among them. Also, such a study may motivate introducing new fairness notions, or modifications to existing fairness notions. Among other properties, we introduce definitions for monotonicity that postulate that having higher entitlement should be better to the agent than having lower entitlement. Some monotonicity notions, such as population monotonicity and weight monotonicity, appeared in previous work, but we prefer to consider other monotonicity properties that we refer to as global monotonicity and individual monotonicity. We find that some of the fairness notions (but not all) violate our monotonicity notions in a strong sense, that we refer to as the inversion paradox. Under this paradox, a fairness notion enforces that the value received by an agent decreases when the entitlement of the agent increases.
Avoiding Contradictions in the Paradoxes, the Halting Problem, and Diagonalization

Timothy J. Armstrong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1509.08003

2015-09-29

Abstract:The fundamental proposal in this article is that logical formulas of the form (f <-> ~f) are not contradictions, and that formulas of the form (t <-> t) are not tautologies. Such formulas, wherever they appear in mathematics, are instead reason to conclude that f and t have a third truth value, different from true and false. These formulas are circular definitions of f and t. We can interpret the implication formula (f <-> ~f) as a rule, a procedure, to find the truth value of f on the left side: we just need to find the truth value of f on the right side. When we use the rules to ask if f and t are true or false, we need to keep asking if they are true or false over and over, forever. Russell's paradox and the liar paradox have the form (f <-> ~f). The truth value provides a straightforward means of avoiding contradictions in these problems. One broad consequence is that the technique of proof by contradiction involving formulas of the form (f <-> ~f) becomes invalid. One such proof by contradiction is one form of proof that the halting problem is uncomputable. The truth value also appears in Cantor's diagonal argument, Berry's paradox, and the Grelling-Nelson paradox.

Logic in Computer Science
Strong Equivalence Made Easy: Nested Expressions and Weight Constraints

Hudson Turner

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.cs/0312029

2003-12-15

Logic in Computer Science

Abstract:Logic programs P and Q are strongly equivalent if, given any program R, programs P union R and Q union R are equivalent (that is, have the same answer sets). Strong equivalence is convenient for the study of equivalent transformations of logic programs: one can prove that a local change is correct without considering the whole program. Lifschitz, Pearce and Valverde showed that Heyting's logic of here-and-there can be used to characterize strong equivalence for logic programs with nested expressions (which subsume the better-known extended disjunctive programs). This note considers a simpler, more direct characterization of strong equivalence for such programs, and shows that it can also be applied without modification to the weight constraint programs of Niemela and Simons. Thus, this characterization of strong equivalence is convenient for the study of equivalent transformations of logic programs written in the input languages of answer set programming systems dlv and smodels. The note concludes with a brief discussion of results that can be used to automate reasoning about strong equivalence, including a novel encoding that reduces the problem of deciding the strong equivalence of a pair of weight constraint programs to that of deciding the inconsistency of a weight constraint program.
The virtues and vices of equilibrium and the future of financial economics

J. Doyne Farmer,John Geanakoplos

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.0803.2996

2008-03-20

Abstract:The use of equilibrium models in economics springs from the desire for parsimonious models of economic phenomena that take human reasoning into account. This approach has been the cornerstone of modern economic theory. We explain why this is so, extolling the virtues of equilibrium theory; then we present a critique and describe why this approach is inherently limited, and why economics needs to move in new directions if it is to continue to make progress. We stress that this shouldn't be a question of dogma, but should be resolved empirically. There are situations where equilibrium models provide useful predictions and there are situations where they can never provide useful predictions. There are also many situations where the jury is still out, i.e., where so far they fail to provide a good description of the world, but where proper extensions might change this. Our goal is to convince the skeptics that equilibrium models can be useful, but also to make traditional economists more aware of the limitations of equilibrium models. We sketch some alternative approaches and discuss why they should play an important role in future research in economics.

General Finance,Physics and Society
A transfer principle for second-order arithmetic, and applications

Merlin Carl,Asgar Jamneshan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1804.01573

2018-04-04

Logic

Abstract:In the theory of conditional sets, many classical theorems from areas such as functional analysis, probability theory or measure theory are lifted to a conditional framework, often to be applied in areas such as mathematical economics or optimization. The frequent experience that such theorems can be proved by `conditionalizations' of the classical proofs suggests that a general transfer principle is in the background, and that formulating and proving such a transfer principle would yield a wealth of useful further conditional versions of classical results, in addition to providing a uniform approach to the results already known. In this paper, we formulate and prove such a transfer principle based on second-order arithmetic, which, by the results of reverse mathematics, suffices for the bulk of classical mathematics, including real analysis, measure theory and countable algebra, and excluding only more remote realms like category theory, set-theoretical topology or uncountable set theory, see e.g. the introduction of \cite{simpson2009subsystems}.This transfer principle is then employed to give short and easy proofs of conditional versions of central results in various areas of mathematics, including theorems which have not been proven by hand previously such as Peano existence theorem, Urysohn's lemma and the Markov-Kakutani fixed point theorem. Moreover, we compare the interpretation of certain structures in a conditional model with their meaning in a standard model.
Rethinking set theory

Tom Leinster

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1212.6543

2012-12-29

Abstract:Mathematicians manipulate sets with confidence almost every day, rarely making mistakes. Few of us, however, could accurately quote what are often referred to as "the" axioms of set theory. This suggests that we all carry around with us, perhaps subconsciously, a reliable body of operating principles for manipulating sets. What if we were to take some of those principles and adopt them as our axioms instead? The message of this article is that this can be done, in a simple, practical way (due to Lawvere). The resulting axioms are ten thoroughly mundane statements about sets. This is an expository article for a general mathematical readership.

Logic,Category Theory
Connecting Simple and Precise P-values to Complex and Ambiguous Realities

Sander Greenland

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/sjos.12645

2023-09-13

Abstract:Mathematics is a limited component of solutions to real-world problems, as it expresses only what is expected to be true if all our assumptions are correct, including implicit assumptions that are omnipresent and often incorrect. Statistical methods are rife with implicit assumptions whose violation can be life-threatening when results from them are used to set policy. Among them are that there is human equipoise or unbiasedness in data generation, management, analysis, and reporting. These assumptions correspond to levels of cooperation, competence, neutrality, and integrity that are absent more often than we would like to believe. Given this harsh reality, we should ask what meaning, if any, we can assign to the P-values, 'statistical significance' declarations, 'confidence' intervals, and posterior probabilities that are used to decide what and how to present (or spin) discussions of analyzed data. By themselves, P-values and CI do not test any hypothesis, nor do they measure the significance of results or the confidence we should have in them. The sense otherwise is an ongoing cultural error perpetuated by large segments of the statistical and research community via misleading terminology. So-called 'inferential' statistics can only become contextually interpretable when derived explicitly from causal stories about the real data generator (such as randomization), and can only become reliable when those stories are based on valid and public documentation of the physical mechanisms that generated the data. Absent these assurances, traditional interpretations of statistical results become pernicious fictions that need to be replaced by far more circumspect descriptions of data and model relations.

Methodology,Quantitative Methods
Mathematical Representation in Economics and Finance: Philosophical Preference, Mathematical Simplicity, and Empirical Relevance

Ping Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49872-0_2

2017-01-01

Abstract:As Keynes pointed out, classical economics was similar to Euclidean geometry, but the reality is non-Euclidean. Now we have abundant evidence that market movements are nonlinear, non-equilibrium, and economic behavior is collective in nature. But mainstream economics and econometrics are still dominated by linear, equilibrium models of representative agent. A critical issue in economics is the selection criteria among competing math models. Economists may choose the preferred math representation by philosophical preference; or by mathematical beauty or computational simplicity. From historical lessons in physics, we choose the proper math by its empirical relevance, even at the costs of increasing mathematical dimensionality and computational complexity. Math representations can be judged by empirical features and historical implications. Recent historical events of financial crisis reveal the comparative advantage of the advanced math representation. Technology progress facilitates future advancements in mathematical representation and philosophical change in economic thinking.
Paradox-Proof Utility Functions for Heavy-Tailed Payoffs: Two Instructive Two-Envelope Problems

Michael R. Powers

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/risks3010026

2015-01-01

Risks

Abstract:We identify restrictions on a decision maker’s utility function that are both necessary and sufficient to preserve dominance reasoning in each of two versions of the Two-Envelope Paradox (TEP). For the classical TEP, the utility function must satisfy a certain recurrence inequality. For the St. Petersburg TEP, the utility function must be bounded above asymptotically by a power function, which can be tightened to a constant. By determining the weakest conditions for dominance reasoning to hold, the article settles an open question in the research literature. Remarkably, neither constant-bounded utility nor finite expected utility is necessary for resolving the classical TEP; instead, finite expected utility is both necessary and sufficient for resolving the St. Petersburg TEP.
Coins and Logic

Tanya Khovanova

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1801.01143

2018-01-04

Abstract:We establish fun parallels between coin-weighing puzzles and knights-and-knaves puzzles.

History and Overview,Artificial Intelligence,Combinatorics
Coarsening natural deduction proofs II: finding gaunt proofs

Ethan Brauer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exae003

2024-02-19

Journal of Logic and Computation

Abstract:Abstract This paper is the second part of a series exploring how, given a proof, we can inductively transform it into a proof that contains no irrelevancies and is as strong as possible. In the prequel paper, I defined a weaker and a stronger notion of what counts as a proof with no irrelevancies, calling them perfect proofs and gaunt proofs, respectively. There, I showed how proofs in core logic and classical core logic can be transformed into perfect proofs. In this paper I study gaunt proofs. I show how proofs in core logic can be inductively transformed into gaunt core proofs, but that this property fails for the natural deduction system of classical core logic.

computer science, theory & methods,logic
One trade at a time -- unraveling the Equity Premium Puzzle

Andrei N. Soklakov

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1507.07214

2020-08-31

Abstract:Financial markets provide a natural quantitative lab for understanding some of the most advanced human behaviours. Among them is the use of mathematical tools known as financial instruments. Besides money, the two most fundamental financial instruments are bonds and equities. More than 30 years ago Mehra and Prescott found the numerical performance of equities relative to government bonds could not be explained by consumption-based (mainstream) economic theories. This empirical observation, known as the Equity Premium Puzzle, has been defying mainstream economics ever since. The recent financial crisis revealed an even deeper need for understanding financial products. We show how understanding the rational nature of product design resolves the Equity Premium Puzzle. In doing so we obtain an experimentally tested theory of product design.

General Finance,General Economics,Mathematical Finance,Statistical Finance
On Truthful Mechanisms without Pareto-efficiency: Characterizations and Fairness

Moshe Babaioff,Noam Manaker Morag

2024-11-18

Abstract:We consider the problem of allocating heterogeneous and indivisible goods among strategic agents, with preferences over subsets of goods, when there is no medium of exchange. This model captures the well studied problem of fair allocation of indivisible goods. Serial-quota mechanisms are allocation mechanisms where there is a predefined order over agents, and each agent in her turn picks a predefined number of goods from the remaining goods. These mechanisms are clearly strategy-proof, non-bossy, and neutral. Are there other mechanisms with these properties? We show that for important classes of strict ordinal preferences (as lexicographic preferences, and as the class of all strict preferences), these are the only mechanisms with these properties. Importantly, unlike previous work, we can prove the claim even for mechanisms that are not Pareto-efficient. Moreover, we generalize these results to preferences that are cardinal, including any valuation class that contains additive valuations. We then derive strong negative implications of this result on truthful mechanisms for fair allocation of indivisible goods to agents with additive valuations.

Computer Science and Game Theory,Theoretical Economics
Proofs for the New Definitions in Financial Markets

Atilla Aras

2024-05-28

Abstract:Constructing theorems can help to determine the shape of certain utility curves that make up the new definitions in financial markets. The aim of this study was to present proofs for these theorems. Basic thoughts of new alternative definitions emerge from the decision-making under uncertainty in economics and finance. Shape of the certain utility curve is central to standard definitions in determining risk attitudes of investors. Shape alone determines risk behavior of investors in standard theory. Although the terms risk-averse, risk-loving, and risk-neutral are equivalent to strict concavity, strict convexity, and linearity, respectively, in standard theory, strict concavity or strict convexity, or linearity are valid for certain new definitions, not being the same as standard theory. Hence, it can be stated that new alternative definitions are broader than standard definitions from the viewpoint of shape. For instance, the certain utility curve of a risk-averse investor can be strictly concave or strictly convex, or linear in alternative definitions.

General Finance,General Economics
Truth, Proof, and Reproducibility: There's no counter-attack for the codeless

Charles T. Gray,Ben Marwick

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1907.05947

2019-07-11

Abstract:Current concerns about reproducibility in many research communities can be traced back to a high value placed on empirical reproducibility of the physical details of scientific experiments and observations. For example, the detailed descriptions by 17th century scientist Robert Boyle of his vacuum pump experiments are often held to be the ideal of reproducibility as a cornerstone of scientific practice. Victoria Stodden has claimed that the computer is an analog for Boyle's pump -- another kind of scientific instrument that needs detailed descriptions of how it generates results. In the place of Boyle's hand-written notes, we now expect code in open source programming languages to be available to enable others to reproduce and extend computational experiments. In this paper we show that there is another genealogy for reproducibility, starting at least from Euclid, in the production of proofs in mathematics. Proofs have a distinctive quality of being necessarily reproducible, and are the cornerstone of mathematical science. However, the task of the modern mathematical scientist has drifted from that of blackboard rhetorician, where the craft of proof reigned, to a scientific workflow that now more closely resembles that of an experimental scientist. So, what is proof in modern mathematics? And, if proof is unattainable in other fields, what is due scientific diligence in a computational experimental environment? How do we measure truth in the context of uncertainty? Adopting a manner of Lakatosian conversant conjecture between two mathematicians, we examine how proof informs our practice of computational statistical inquiry. We propose that a reorientation of mathematical science is necessary so that its reproducibility can be readily assessed.

History and Overview,Other Statistics

We Hold These Truths not to be Self-evident, Part 2: Strong and simple

Deflationism And The Invisible Power Of Truth

Hard Proofs and Good Reasons

On Weak Values and Feynman's Blind Alley

A Simple Proof of the Fundamental Theorem of Asset Pricing

Explaining Arguments' Strength: Unveiling the Role of Attacks and Supports (Technical Report)

The inversion paradox, and classification of fairness notions

Avoiding Contradictions in the Paradoxes, the Halting Problem, and Diagonalization

Strong Equivalence Made Easy: Nested Expressions and Weight Constraints

The virtues and vices of equilibrium and the future of financial economics

A transfer principle for second-order arithmetic, and applications

Rethinking set theory

Connecting Simple and Precise P-values to Complex and Ambiguous Realities

Mathematical Representation in Economics and Finance: Philosophical Preference, Mathematical Simplicity, and Empirical Relevance

Paradox-Proof Utility Functions for Heavy-Tailed Payoffs: Two Instructive Two-Envelope Problems

Coins and Logic

Coarsening natural deduction proofs II: finding gaunt proofs

One trade at a time -- unraveling the Equity Premium Puzzle

On Truthful Mechanisms without Pareto-efficiency: Characterizations and Fairness

Proofs for the New Definitions in Financial Markets

Truth, Proof, and Reproducibility: There's no counter-attack for the codeless