Which equality (not preference equivalence) of measures are you talking about for Homogenous Mixtures?
The order doesn’t satisfy Homogenous Mixtures, but maybe it also doesn’t satisfy Intermediate Mixtures. For Homogenous Mixtures, using lotteries over actual utilities, i.e. the payoff/outcome is its utility, for i=0,1,2,…,
X=0
Ai=12δ2i+12δ−2i=2i or −2i, each with probability 1⁄2. This is equivalent to X=0 since we’re ranking based on expected utility when both lotteries are bounded.
pi=12i+1
It doesn’t order ∑∞i=1piAi vs X, because fixing q and taking p→0, the integral for ∑ipiAi≥0 diverges to −∞, and the integral for 0≥∑ipiAi diverges to −∞. Note that
∑∞i=1piAi=12A++12A−, where
A+=∑∞i=012i+1δ2i,A−=∑∞i=012i+1δ−2i,
so a mixture of two lotteries, one diverging to +∞, and the other diverging to −∞.
On the other hand, if you require q=1−p, then the integral will actually be 0 for each p for this particular lottery, since the lottery is symmetric around p=12, so you do get equivalence. I suspect we can come up with another counterexample by messing around with how fast each tail is approached and get the liminf of the integral to be positive, and so rank ∑ipiAi>0. Maybe instead defining Ai this way would work:
Ai=(1−11+2i)δ2i+11+2iδ−4i.
The idea is that the negative terms get much less far for the same p, because far more of the weight is in much lower probability events. The integral for ∑ipiAi≥0 is roughly counting the number of positive terms whose probability is above cp and subtracting the number of negative terms whose probability is above cp, for some constant c (I can’t be bothered to figure out exactly which c). This should go to +∞ as p→0.
I think you can make things worse, too, again with q=1−p. You can choose Ai<0 for each i, but have ∑ipiAi>0 by replacing the −4i with −4i−1. I think we can even get the gap between Ai and 0 to diverge as i→∞, with something like −4i−i(1+2i) or even −4i−3i instead of −4i. If we allow p and q to vary independently again, ∑ipiAi and 0 are just incomparable, which seems okay.
Unfortunately, the quantile function is a pain to work with, so checking whether Intermediate Mixtures holds seems tricky.
Which equality (not preference equivalence) of measures are you talking about for Homogenous Mixtures?
The order doesn’t satisfy Homogenous Mixtures, but maybe it also doesn’t satisfy Intermediate Mixtures. For Homogenous Mixtures, using lotteries over actual utilities, i.e. the payoff/outcome is its utility, for i=0,1,2,…,
X=0
Ai=12δ2i+12δ−2i=2i or −2i, each with probability 1⁄2. This is equivalent to X=0 since we’re ranking based on expected utility when both lotteries are bounded.
pi=12i+1
It doesn’t order ∑∞i=1piAi vs X, because fixing q and taking p→0, the integral for ∑ipiAi≥0 diverges to −∞, and the integral for 0≥∑ipiAi diverges to −∞. Note that
∑∞i=1piAi=12A++12A−, where
A+=∑∞i=012i+1δ2i, A−=∑∞i=012i+1δ−2i,
so a mixture of two lotteries, one diverging to +∞, and the other diverging to −∞.
On the other hand, if you require q=1−p, then the integral will actually be 0 for each p for this particular lottery, since the lottery is symmetric around p=12, so you do get equivalence. I suspect we can come up with another counterexample by messing around with how fast each tail is approached and get the liminf of the integral to be positive, and so rank ∑ipiAi>0. Maybe instead defining Ai this way would work:
Ai=(1−11+2i)δ2i+11+2iδ−4i.
The idea is that the negative terms get much less far for the same p, because far more of the weight is in much lower probability events. The integral for ∑ipiAi≥0 is roughly counting the number of positive terms whose probability is above cp and subtracting the number of negative terms whose probability is above cp, for some constant c (I can’t be bothered to figure out exactly which c). This should go to +∞ as p→0.
I think you can make things worse, too, again with q=1−p. You can choose Ai<0 for each i, but have ∑ipiAi>0 by replacing the −4i with −4i−1. I think we can even get the gap between Ai and 0 to diverge as i→∞, with something like −4i−i(1+2i) or even −4i−3i instead of −4i. If we allow p and q to vary independently again, ∑ipiAi and 0 are just incomparable, which seems okay.
Unfortunately, the quantile function is a pain to work with, so checking whether Intermediate Mixtures holds seems tricky.