Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 53 references

Stochastic Choice with Distribution-Dependent Preferences

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A stochastic-choice array generated by endogenous preference feedback through the conditional distribution of latent states can never be represented by dynamic random utility.

desk verdict Genuinely new conditional-McKean-Vlasov machinery and a sound impossibility theorem, but the separation from dynamic random utility is proven over a counterfactual observation domain, not over realized choice data—worth referee time, with the empirical claims needing to be scaled back. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.06152 v1 pith:JJWPW4CZ submitted 2026-08-06 econ.TH

Paramahansa Pramanik This is my paper · ORCID
classification econ.TH MSC 91B0691B1660H1060G35
keywords stochasticchoicedistribution-dependentutilitydynamicrandomendogenouspreferenceevolutionconditionalMcKean-Vlasovdynamicsbehavioralidentificationimpossibilitydistribution
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that preferences can evolve endogenously: the analyst's conditional distribution of latent preference states, inferred from observed choices, feeds back into current utility and into the future dynamics of preferences. The author contrasts this distribution-dependent utility (DDU) with dynamic random utility (DRU), where latent preferences evolve exogenously and history matters only through learning. The central claim is that behavioral distributional feedback is observable and places the induced stochastic-choice array outside the DRU class, so endogenous preference evolution is a genuinely new behavioral phenomenon rather than a reparameterization. The paper also argues that stochastic choice identifies a two-part behavioral representation, contemporaneous choice and continuation behavior, and that DDU reduces to DRU if and only if both parts are invariant. A sympathetic reader would care because, if true, choice data can in principle detect whether preferences are being changed by what people have already chosen.

What carries the argument

The central object is the conditional preference distribution (CPD) $\mu_s = L(X_s \mid F^Y_s)$, the analyst's posterior over the latent preference state given observed behavior; the paper treats this distribution as an endogenous state rather than a passive posterior. The behavioral representation $\Phi=(\Phi_u,\Phi_P)$ decomposes observable implications into contemporaneous choice rankings $\Phi_u$ and continuation transition operators $\Phi_P$. The argument is carried by the requirement that the conditional-law operator $\Gamma$ on $C([0,t];\mathcal{P}_2(\mathbb{R}^d))$ has a fixed point $\mu=\Gamma(\mu)$, where the coefficients of the dynamics depend on $(s,X_s,Y_s,\mu_s)$. Well-posedness comes from Lipschitz and linear-growth conditions in the 2-Wasserstein metric, a Schauder-Tychonoff fixed-point argument for existence, and a Gronwall-style filter-stability condition for weak uniqueness. The impossibility theorem builds on the equivalence between DRU reducibility and behavioral distributional invariance.

What would settle it

Take a two-period binary-choice panel in which an exogenous public signal shifts the analyst's posterior over latent preferences without changing the decision maker's fundamentals. Under DRU, the equilibrium choice kernels must satisfy the distributional invariance identities $C_s(z;A|\nu,\mu)=C_s(z;A|\nu,\mu')$ and $D_{s,r}^{\bar\mu}(z;A|\lambda,m)=D_{s,r}^{\bar\mu}(z;A|\lambda,m')$ for admissible flows. If estimated choice probabilities from such an experiment reject these identities, Theorem 19 predicts the data lie outside $R_{\mathrm{DRU}}$; if the identities always hold, the behavioral separation would fail. A concrete implementation is to compare choices after different public information histories that induce the same posterior $\mu_s$ but different counterfactual flows.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Distribution-dependent utility makes the conditional preference distribution $\mu_s = L(X_s \mid F^Y_s)$ an endogenous state variable: $\mu_s$ enters the felicity index $u(s,\cdot,X_s,\mu_s)$ and the coefficients $(b,\sigma,\sigma_0,h,\Sigma_Y)$ of the latent-observable system, generating the feedback $X \to Y \to \mu \to X$. The paper's main theorem states that if the stochastic-choice array generated by a DDU representation exhibits behavioral distributional feedback---either choice-relevant felicity feedback or behaviorally relevant preference feedback---then the array admits no dynamic random utility representation. Equivalently, $R_{\mathrm{DDU}}$ strictly enlarges $R_{\mathrm{DRU}}$. The same behavioral apparatus yields a characterization of reducibility: DDU reduces to DRU exactly when both the contemporaneous choice map $\mu \mapsto C_s$ and the continuation transition map $m \mapsto D_{s,r}$ are constant on the reachable domain. On the probabilistic side, the paper establishes existence and weak uniqueness of the underlying conditional McKean-Vlasov system with conditional-law feedback, so the behavioral objects are generated by a well-posed fixed-point problem.

Load-bearing premise

The identification and impossibility results assume the analyst observes the full counterfactual stochastic-choice array on the domain $O_0 \cup O_1$---including choices under arbitrary latent-state distributions, distributional states, initial laws, and measure flows---whereas real choice data contain only realized histories and equilibrium-path choice kernels. If that counterfactual domain is not granted, the empirical separation of DDU from DRU loses its observational grounding.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If behavioral distributional feedback is present, any fitted dynamic random utility model will misattribute endogenous preference change to Bayesian learning about exogenous preferences.
  • Stochastic-choice data identify the behavioral image $(\Phi_u,\Phi_P)$ but not the primitive coefficient tuple, so structural parameters are only identified up to observational equivalence.
  • Distribution-dependent utility reduces to dynamic random utility if and only if both contemporaneous and continuation choice maps are invariant, which is a testable condition for when exogenous preference dynamics suffice.
  • The conditional McKean-Vlasov system is well posed, so the model yields coherent equilibrium preference dynamics rather than an arbitrary feedback loop.
  • Comparative statics and policy analysis should target the behavioral quotient and the conditional-law operator rather than individual coefficients.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: the impossibility theorem is stated for full counterfactual arrays; with equilibrium panel data alone, detecting feedback may require exogenous variation in information or menus that changes the analyst's posterior while holding the decision maker's payoff-relevant state fixed.
  • Editorial inference: the same feedback mechanism could be imported into dynamic discrete choice estimation, where conditional choice probability inversion typically assumes state evolution is exogenous; Theorem 19 gives a formal sense in which such estimates are misspecified when distributional feedback operates.
  • Editorial inference: a direct empirical strategy is to test whether public signals that move the conditional preference distribution shift future choice probabilities even after controlling for the private latent state; DDU predicts yes, DRU predicts no.
  • Editorial inference: welfare and policy exercises should be designed around the transition operator and its fixed-point manifold, since the paper's rigidity results imply interventions that leave it unchanged are behaviorally null.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper develops a continuous-time stochastic choice model, DDU, in which the analyst's conditional distribution of latent preferences (the CPD) enters both the current felicity index and the law of motion of latent preferences. It proves existence and weak uniqueness for the resulting conditional McKean-Vlasov system (Theorem 3), defines a behavioral representation Φ=(Φ_u,Φ_P), proves identification of Φ from the observable array (Theorem 22), characterizes when DDU reduces to DRU (Theorem 18), and claims a behavioral impossibility theorem: any array exhibiting behavioral distributional feedback lies outside the DRU class (Theorem 19). The main text contains detailed proof sketches, with the probabilistic proofs in a Supplementary Appendix.

Significance. The probabilistic well-posedness of the conditional McKean-Vlasov system is a valuable technical contribution, and the conceptual decomposition of feedback into felicity and preference channels is useful. The paper is ambitious in linking stochastic choice, filtering, and mean-field dynamics. However, the claimed behavioral separation and identification results are established for an observation domain that includes counterfactual latent-state distributions and measure flows; for realized stochastic-choice data the central separation claim is not demonstrated. With appropriate qualifications the structural results may be publishable, but as stated the behavioral theorems overreach.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.3 (observable domain) and Theorem 19] The impossibility theorem is proven for the counterfactual array Qθ defined on O0∪O1, which includes arbitrary ν, μ, λ, and m. In actual stochastic-choice data the analyst observes only the equilibrium diagonal C_s(z;A|μ_s,μ_s) and realized histories. The proof of Theorem 19 transfers DRU's distributional invariance to DDU only because T(θ)=T(θ~) is assumed on all of O0∪O1; without observing the off-diagonal comparisons in Definitions 6 and 8, a DRU alternative cannot be rejected from realized data. Therefore the conclusion that R_DDU strictly enlarges R_DRU holds only relative to a counterfactual observation protocol, not for stochastic-choice arrays in the usual observational sense.
  2. [Section 3.3, Theorem 22] Theorem 22 (Behavioral identification) relies on Assumption 16 (injectivity of μ↦C_s and ν↦C_r) and Assumption 21 (the choice-test class H_r separates and is measure-determining on reachable laws P_r). These assumptions are imposed on the full counterfactual domain, and the proof uses equality of integrals against all ν∈N_s(μ) and all reachable ρ. Since the observation domain already contains all such ν and ρ, the identification is essentially an injectivity assumption on the observation map. The abstract's claim that the representation 'is identified from stochastic choice' would require identification from the diagonal C_s(·;·|μ_s,μ_s) alone; that claim is not established.
  3. [Section 3.1, Definitions 6–9] Behavioral distributional feedback is defined through C_s(z;A|ν,μ) at arbitrary ν holding μ fixed, and through D_{s,r}(z;A|λ,m) at externally specified measure flows m,m'. Reachability (Assumptions 8, 13, 16) is defined through the model, but the analyst's data do not include these counterfactual variations. Consequently, the 'observable restrictions' on stochastic choice highlighted in the introduction and abstract are not restrictions on realized choice frequencies; they are restrictions on a hypothetical array that varies latent distributions and measure flows. This is the load-bearing issue for the paper's central empirical claims.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Supplementary Appendix SA.3.1–SA.3.3] The labeling of proofs is inconsistent with the main text: SA.3.1 proves 'Proposition 26' and SA.3.2 proves 'Theorem 27', while the main text numbers these as Lemma 26 and Theorem 28; the numbering should be harmonized throughout.
  2. [Throughout] There are several typos: 'therefor,e' in Supplement SA.3.3; a repeated 'decision' in the Introduction; '∂ εΓε̸=0' with missing spaces in Section 4.4; and the tuple in Remark 8 lists u twice.
  3. [Section 1.1 and 5.1] The paper claims to be the 'first' continuous-time theory of endogenous preference evolution. Given the proximity to conditional McKean-Vlasov models (Carmona et al.; Buckdahn et al.), the novelty claim should be stated more cautiously, e.g., 'first to our knowledge' or with a more precise delineation from existing conditional-law frameworks.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the impossibility result is a definitional corollary, not an independent derivation, but the paper's nontrivial characterization and identification results are self-contained; main caveats are observational and existential rather than circular.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained, and no load-bearing step reduces to a fitted parameter, a prior author-uniqueness theorem, or a self-citation. Theorem 19's behavioral impossibility is a conditional corollary: Definition 9 defines behavioral distributional feedback as the failure of the invariance properties in Definitions 6 and 8, while Proposition 7 derives those invariance properties for DRU from the fact that a DRU representation has coefficients independent of the conditional-law argument. The proof of Theorem 19 then unpacks these definitions after assuming equality of the full counterfactual arrays T(θ)=T(θ~). This makes the impossibility definitionally immediate, but not harmfully circular, because the paper also proves the nontrivial converse characterization in Theorem 18, giving exact DRU-reducibility conditions under Assumption 16. The identification results, especially Theorem 22, are formal consequences of defining the observable stochastic-choice array Q_θ as the evaluation map T=Λ∘Φ and imposing injectivity assumptions; this makes identification true by construction, though it shifts the empirical content to whether the counterfactual variations in O_0∪O_1 are actually observable. The strongest claim that R_DDU strictly enlarges R_DRU requires a proof that some admissible DDU array exhibits behavioral distributional feedback; the paper assumes this through Assumption 13 rather than constructing an explicit example, so the strict enlargement is conditional and under-supported on the realized-observation domain. This is an evidentiary/existence caveat, not circularity. The only self-citations, Pramanik (2025) and Pramanik (2026), are contextual references to classical McKean-Vlasov and mean-field economics and are not load-bearing for the paper's main results. Accordingly, no circular step reaches the score threshold; the central caveats are about observational grounding and existence, not circular reasoning.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 9 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted to data. The central claims rest on standard stochastic analysis plus a long list of strong injectivity, separation, and observability assumptions. The invented-entity count is zero because X, Y, and mu are standard mathematical objects, not new physical or economic entities. The counterfactual-observability assumption is the most consequential and least justified.

assumptions (9)
  • domain assumption Well-posedness of conditional MVSDE with conditional-law feedback (Buckdahn et al. framework, Conditions GV1-GV6 and GU1-GU3 in SA.1)
    Existence and weak uniqueness of system (3) are imported from the conditional McKean-Vlasov theory; all behavioral results require admissible solutions.
  • domain assumption Assumption 1: Lipschitz, linear growth, uniform ellipticity of coefficients
    Standard regularity to ensure the SDE system and frozen-flow martingale problems are well posed.
  • domain assumption Assumption 5: no ties almost surely for choice indicators
    Rigid tie assumption simplifies choice probabilities; the authors note a measurable tie-breaker could replace it.
  • ad hoc to paper Assumption 8: map nu -> C_s(.;.|nu,mu) is injective on reachable distributions
    Used in Proposition 9 to guarantee that distinct latent-state distributions generate distinct choice kernels.
  • domain assumption Assumption 10: utility Lipschitz in (x,mu) and margin condition near indifference
    Yields W2-half continuity of the choice kernel, needed for stability results.
  • ad hoc to paper Assumption 13: nondegeneracy of the map m -> P^{m,X}
    Ensures that coefficient dependence on mu has observable consequences in transition laws.
  • ad hoc to paper Assumption 16: injectivity of mu -> C_s and nu -> C_r on admissible classes
    Critical for the characterization of DRU reduction and for the impossibility theorem; strong and not derived from more primitive postulates.
  • ad hoc to paper Assumption 21: choice-test class H_r separates and is measure-determining on reachable laws P_r
    Needed for identification of Phi_P from choice kernels; a finite set of indicators may fail to separate general transition laws.
  • ad hoc to paper Counterfactual observability: analyst observes C_s(z;A|nu,mu) for all admissible nu,mu and D for all lambda,m
    The 'stochastic-choice data' in Section 3.3 are defined on a counterfactual domain, not on realized paths; without this, empirical identification fails.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Stochastic Choice with Distribution-Dependent Preferences." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JJWPW4CZ

@misc{pith2026260806152,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Stochastic Choice with Distribution-Dependent Preferences},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JJWPW4CZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.06152}
}
read the original abstract

We develop a continuous-time stochastic choice theory with endogenous preference evolution. Unlike dynamic random utility, observed behavior affects future preferences through the conditional distribution of latent preference states, generating endogenous distributional feedback. We show that this feedback has observable behavioral implications and characterize stochastic choice by a behavioral representation consisting of contemporaneous choice and continuation behavior. This representation is identified from stochastic choice, yields a rigidity result linking structural preference dynamics to observable behavior, and characterizes exactly when distribution dependent utility is behaviorally reducible to dynamic random utility. We further prove a behavioral impossibility theorem: stochastic choice arrays exhibiting behavioral distributional feedback admit no dynamic random utility representation. On the probabilistic side, we establish existence and weak uniqueness for the underlying conditional McKean-Vlasov system with conditional law feedback. The structure unifies endogenous information, latent preference dynamics, behavioral identification, and stochastic choice within a single continuous-time model.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Econometrica , volume=

    Dynamic random utility , author=. Econometrica , volume=. 2019 , publisher=

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    Econometrica , volume =

    Rust, John , title =. Econometrica , volume =. 1987 , doi =

    work page 1987

  3. [3]

    , title =

    Kreps, David M. , title =

  4. [4]

    Journal of Political Economy , volume =

    Caplin, Andrew and Dean, Mark and Leahy, John , title =. Journal of Political Economy , volume =. 2022 , doi =

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    and Durlauf, Steven N

    Brock, William A. and Durlauf, Steven N. , title =. Review of Economic Studies , volume =. 2001 , doi =

    2001

  6. [6]

    International Game Theory Review , pages=

    Strategic dynamics of firms via path integral control , author=. International Game Theory Review , pages=. 2026 , publisher=

    work page 2026

  7. [7]

    American Economic Review , volume =

    Cerreia-Vioglio, Simone and Dillenberger, David and Ortoleva, Pietro and Riella, Giorgio , title =. American Economic Review , volume =. 2019 , doi =

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    and Ma, Xinwei and Masatlioglu, Yusufcan and Suleymanov, Elchin , title =

    Cattaneo, Matias D. and Ma, Xinwei and Masatlioglu, Yusufcan and Suleymanov, Elchin , title =. Journal of Political Economy , volume =. 2020 , doi =

    work page 2020

Show all 53 references
  1. [9]

    and Lu, Jiwei , title =

    Apesteguia, Jose and Ballester, Miguel A. and Lu, Jiwei , title =. Econometrica , volume =. 2017 , doi =

    2017

  2. [10]

    The Annals of Applied Probability , volume=

    On the convergence of closed-loop Nash equilibria to the mean field game limit , author=. The Annals of Applied Probability , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  3. [11]

    Ecole d'

    Topics in propagation of chaos , author=. Ecole d'. 2006 , publisher=

    2006

  4. [12]

    Econometrica , volume =

    Fudenberg, Drew and Iijima, Ryo and Strzalecki, Tomasz , title =. Econometrica , volume =. 2015 , doi =

    2015

  5. [13]

    Mathematics , volume=

    Construction of an optimal strategy: An analytic insight through path integral control driven by a mckean--vlasov opinion dynamics , author=. Mathematics , volume=. 2025 , publisher=

    2025

  6. [14]

    Econometrica , volume =

    Gul, Faruk and Pesendorfer, Wolfgang , title =. Econometrica , volume =. 2006 , doi =

    2006

  7. [15]

    , title =

    Arcidiacono, Peter and Ellickson, Paul B. , title =. Annual Review of Economics , volume =. 2011 , doi =

    2011

  8. [16]

    Econometrica , volume =

    Kitamura, Yuichi and Stoye, J\"org , title =. Econometrica , volume =. 2018 , doi =

    2018

  9. [17]

    42nd IEEE international conference on decision and control (IEEE cat

    Individual and mass behaviour in large population stochastic wireless power control problems: centralized and Nash equilibrium solutions , author=. 42nd IEEE international conference on decision and control (IEEE cat. No. 03CH37475) , volume=. 2003 , organization=

    2003

  10. [18]

    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , volume=

    A class of Markov processes associated with nonlinear parabolic equations , author=. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , volume=

  11. [19]

    Journal of Econometrics , volume =

    Aguirregabiria, Victor and Mira, Pedro , title =. Journal of Econometrics , volume =. 2010 , doi =

    2010

  12. [20]

    Probability Theory and Related Fields , volume=

    A general characterization of the mean field limit for stochastic differential games , author=. Probability Theory and Related Fields , volume=. 2016 , publisher=

    2016

  13. [21]

    Japanese Journal of Mathematics , volume =

    Lasry, Jean-Michel and Lions, Pierre-Louis , title =. Japanese Journal of Mathematics , volume =. 2007 , doi =

    2007

  14. [22]

    , title =

    Manski, Charles F. , title =. Theory and Decision , volume =. 1977 , doi =

    1977

  15. [23]

    The Annals of Applied Probability , volume=

    A general conditional McKean--Vlasov stochastic differential equation , author=. The Annals of Applied Probability , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  16. [24]

    Econometrica , volume =

    Temporal Resolution of Uncertainty and Dynamic Choice Theory , author =. Econometrica , volume =. 1978 , doi =

    1978

  17. [25]

    2018 , publisher=

    Probabilistic theory of mean field games with applications I-II , author=. 2018 , publisher=

    2018

  18. [26]

    The Annals of Probability , year =

    Ren\'e Carmona and François Delarue and Daniel Lacker , title =. The Annals of Probability , year =

  19. [27]

    Frontiers in Econometrics , editor =

    McFadden, Daniel , title =. Frontiers in Econometrics , editor =. 1974 , pages =

    1974

  20. [28]

    and Mira, P

    Aguirregabiria, V. and Mira, P. (2010). Dynamic discrete choice structural models: A survey. Journal of Econometrics , 156(1):38--67

    2010

  21. [29]

    A., and Lu, J

    Apesteguia, J., Ballester, M. A., and Lu, J. (2017). Single-crossing random utility models. Econometrica , 85(2):661--674

    2017

  22. [30]

    and Ellickson, P

    Arcidiacono, P. and Ellickson, P. B. (2011). Practical methods for estimation of dynamic discrete choice models. Annual Review of Economics , 3(1):363--394

    2011

  23. [31]

    Brock, W. A. and Durlauf, S. N. (2001). Discrete choice with social interactions. Review of Economic Studies , 68(2):235--260

    2001

  24. [32]

    Buckdahn, R., Li, J., and Ma, J. (2023). A general conditional mckean--vlasov stochastic differential equation. The Annals of Applied Probability , 33(3):2004--2023

    2023

  25. [33]

    Caplin, A., Dean, M., and Leahy, J. (2022). Rationally inattentive behavior: Characterizing and generalizing shannon entropy. Journal of Political Economy , 130(6):1676--1715

    2022

  26. [34]

    Carmona, R., Delarue, F., et al. (2018). Probabilistic theory of mean field games with applications I-II , volume 3. Springer

    2018

  27. [35]

    Carmona, R., Delarue, F., and Lacker, D. (2016). Mean field games with common noise. The Annals of Probability , 44(6):3740--3803

    2016

  28. [36]

    D., Ma, X., Masatlioglu, Y., and Suleymanov, E

    Cattaneo, M. D., Ma, X., Masatlioglu, Y., and Suleymanov, E. (2020). A random attention model. Journal of Political Economy , 128(7):2796--2836

    2020

  29. [37]

    Cerreia-Vioglio, S., Dillenberger, D., Ortoleva, P., and Riella, G. (2019). Deliberately stochastic. American Economic Review , 109(7):2425--2445

    2019

  30. [38]

    Frick, M., Iijima, R., and Strzalecki, T. (2019). Dynamic random utility. Econometrica , 87(6):1941--2002

    2019

  31. [39]

    Fudenberg, D., Iijima, R., and Strzalecki, T. (2015). Stochastic choice and revealed perturbed utility. Econometrica , 83(6):2371--2409

    2015

  32. [40]

    and Pesendorfer, W

    Gul, F. and Pesendorfer, W. (2006). Random expected utility. Econometrica , 74(1):121--146

    2006

  33. [41]

    E., and Malham \'e , R

    Huang, M., Caines, P. E., and Malham \'e , R. P. (2003). Individual and mass behaviour in large population stochastic wireless power control problems: centralized and nash equilibrium solutions. In 42nd IEEE international conference on decision and control (IEEE cat. No. 03CH3...

    2003

  34. [42]

    and Stoye, J

    Kitamura, Y. and Stoye, J. (2018). Nonparametric analysis of random utility models. Econometrica , 86(6):1883--1909

    2018

  35. [43]

    Kreps, D. M. (1998). Anticipated Utility and Dynamic Choice . Econometric Society Monographs. Cambridge University Press

    1998

  36. [44]

    Lacker, D. (2016). A general characterization of the mean field limit for stochastic differential games. Probability Theory and Related Fields , 165(3):581--648

    2016

  37. [45]

    Lacker, D. (2020). On the convergence of closed-loop nash equilibria to the mean field game limit. The Annals of Applied Probability , 30(4):1693--1761

    2020

  38. [46]

    and Lions, P.-L

    Lasry, J.-M. and Lions, P.-L. (2007). Mean field games. Japanese Journal of Mathematics , 2(1):229--260

    2007

  39. [47]

    Manski, C. F. (1977). The structure of random utility models. Theory and Decision , 8(3):229--254

    1977

  40. [48]

    McFadden, D. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. pages 105--142

    1974

  41. [49]

    McKean Jr, H. P. (1966). A class of markov processes associated with nonlinear parabolic equations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 56(6):1907--1911

    1966

  42. [50]

    Pramanik, P. (2025). Construction of an optimal strategy: An analytic insight through path integral control driven by a mckean--vlasov opinion dynamics. Mathematics , 13(17):2842

    2025

  43. [51]

    Pramanik, P. (2026). Strategic dynamics of firms via path integral control. International Game Theory Review , page 2650006

    2026

  44. [52]

    Rust, J. (1987). Optimal replacement of gmc bus engines: An empirical model of harold zurcher. Econometrica , 55(5):999--1033

    1987

  45. [53]

    Sznitman, A.-S. (2006). Topics in propagation of chaos. In Ecole d' \'e t \'e de probabilit \'e s de Saint-Flour XIX—1989 , pages 165--251. Springer

    2006

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.