Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2610.10207

Identifiable Preference Types and Optimal Menu-Choice Experiments

Abstract

A planner wants to elicit partial information about a subject's preference relation. Preferences are grouped into ``types" relevant to the planner's purpose. Can the planner identify the subject's type through menu-choice data or experiment, without distinguishing preferences within the same type? We provide a complete answer by characterizing identifiable type spaces. The characterization uses a novel geometric condition, called face consistency, which governs distinctions within and across square and hexagonal faces of the permutohedron. For every identifiable type space, we explicitly construct the unique irreducible identifying experiment from its boundary. This experiment is optimal among all identifying experiments under any cost criterion for which adding menus cannot reduce cost. Using the equivalence between identifiability and elicitation with acts, as shown in Azrieli et al. (2021), we study symmetric policies requesting unranked shortlists that contain only acceptable products, include every product preferred to a selected one, and are nonempty whenever an acceptable product exists. Only two such policies are elicitable with acts: requesting the favorite acceptable product or the entire acceptable set.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ujjwal Kumar. 2026-10-07. Identifiable Preference Types and Optimal Menu-Choice Experiments. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.10207

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Learning about informativeness

We study whether individuals can learn the informativeness of their information technology through social learning. As in the classic sequential social learning model, rational agents arrive in order and make decisions based on the past actions of others and their private signals. There is uncertainty regarding the informativeness of the common signal-generating process. We show that in this setting asymptotic learning about informativeness is not guaranteed and depends crucially on the relative tail distributions of private beliefs induced by uninformative and informative signals. We identify the phenomenon of perpetual disagreement as the cause of learning and characterize learning in the canonical Gaussian environment.

econ.TH↗

Regulating a Monopolist through Capacity Control

We study monopoly regulation when capacity is contractible but subsequent output is not. A firm privately observes its production cost before installing costly capacity and then choosing output, while the regulator cannot use transfers. We provide sufficient conditions under which a single capacity floor implements an optimal mechanism with full participation. The floor raises output by changing investment while leaving utilization to the firm after installation costs are sunk. Under additional conditions, the allocation has three regions: laissez-faire, full utilization of the floor, and underutilization. High-cost types knowingly install capacity they will not fully use, yet produce more than under laissez-faire. This physical waste is a necessary evil of optimal regulation that expands service. We also show that underutilization can persist in optimal regulation with capacity-contingent subsidies or a common entry fee.

econ.TH↗

Decision Noise in Threshold Selection

Can noisier threshold selection produce a group with higher mean true value? We answer this question by varying the scale of a fixed assessment error. Holding the selection rate fixed, less noise yields a first-order stochastically dominant distribution of selected values. At a fixed threshold, however, more noise can raise the selected mean even as selection loss, which weights selection mistakes by the distance of true value from the threshold, increases. Under joint Gaussianity, we characterize when the selected mean rises or falls with noise. In treatment selection, noise alone can generate subgroup differences in participants' average gains despite identical population gain distributions.

econ.TH↗