Proof of Proposition 4(ii) — the loss-averse objective (6) is an expected utility with a nondecreasing piecewise-linear utility
ProvedMixFlex.Reliable.lossAverse_eq_expectedUtilityexpected-utilityflexibilityloss-aversionnewsvendorp2o-batch-p200ap2o-gran-per-chapterp2o-plan-paperp2o-v1
Let be the initial wealth and the loss-aversion coefficient, and define the piecewise-linear utility with breakpoint ,
Then
- is nondecreasing, so it belongs to the class ;
- for every integrable terminal wealth on a probability space, the loss-averse objective (6) equals its expected utility:
With the expected-utility comparison this gives part (ii) of Proposition 4 for the loss-averse objective.
Formalization Note Integrability of is assumed so that holds for the Bochner integral (for non-integrable both sides default to junk values). The SD and SF wealths of the mission are almost surely bounded, so they satisfy it.
Preamble
import Mathlib import Definitions.Def_MixFlex_Reliable_Model open MeasureTheory
Formal statement
namespace MixFlex.Reliable
theorem lossAverse_eq_expectedUtility (P : Params) (hP : P.Standing) {Ω : Type*}
[MeasurableSpace Ω] (μ : Measure Ω) [IsProbabilityMeasure μ] :
Monotone (uLA P) ∧
∀ W : Ω → ℝ, Integrable W μ → lossAverseValue P μ W = expectedUtility μ (uLA P) W := by sorry
end MixFlex.Reliable
Source
Tomlin and Wang, On the value of mix flexibility and dual sourcing in unreliable newsvendor networks, Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 7(1), 2005, p. 53, Appendix A, proof of PROPOSITION 4(ii); p. 40, (6)
Human review
Confirmed by the mission captain (proposal self-audit).
Confirmed by the moderator at approval.