On the transitivity of the comonotonic and countermonotonic comparison of random variables

A recently proposed method for the pairwise comparison of arbitrary independent random variables results in a probabilistic relation. When restricted to discrete random variables uniformly distributed on finite multisets of numbers, this probabilistic relation expresses the winning probabilities between pairs of hypothetical dice that carry these numbers and exhibits a particular type of transitivity called dice-transitivity. In case these multisets have equal cardinality, two alternative methods for statistically comparing the ordered lists of the numbers on the faces of the dice have been studied recently: the comonotonic method based upon the comparison of the numbers of the same rank when the lists are in increasing order, and the countermonotonic method, also based upon the comparison of only numbers of the same rank but with the lists in opposite order. In terms of the discrete random variables associated to these lists, these methods each turn out to be related to a particular copula that joins the marginal cumulative distribution functions into a bivariate cumulative distribution function. The transitivity of the generated probabilistic relation has been completely characterized. In this paper, the list comparison methods are generalized for the purpose of comparing arbitrary random variables. The transitivity properties derived in the case of discrete uniform random variables are shown to be generic. Additionally, it is shown that for a collection of normal random variables, both comparison methods lead to a probabilistic relation that is at least moderately stochastic transitive.

[1]  P. Fishburn Binary choice probabilities: on the varieties of stochastic transitivity , 1973 .

[2]  Bhaskar Dutta,et al.  Comparison functions and choice correspondences , 1999 .

[3]  Bernard Monjardet,et al.  A Generalisation of Probabilistic Consistency: Linearity Conditions for Valued Preference Relations , 1988 .

[4]  Radko Mesiar,et al.  Triangular Norms , 2000, Trends in Logic.

[5]  R. Nelsen An Introduction to Copulas , 1998 .

[6]  J. García-Lapresta,et al.  Majority decisions based on difference of votes , 2001 .

[7]  B. De Baets,et al.  Transitivity frameworks for reciprocal relations: cycle-transitivity versus FG-transitivity , 2005, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[8]  B. De Baets,et al.  Cycle-transitive comparison of independent random variables , 2005 .

[9]  H. Nurmi Comparing Voting Systems , 1987 .

[10]  Marc Roubens,et al.  Fuzzy Preference Modelling and Multicriteria Decision Support , 1994, Theory and Decision Library.

[11]  M. Sklar Fonctions de repartition a n dimensions et leurs marges , 1959 .

[12]  P. Moran On the method of paired comparisons. , 1947, Biometrika.

[13]  P. Vincke,et al.  Biorder families, valued relations and preference modelling , 1986 .

[14]  R. Nelsen An Introduction to Copulas (Springer Series in Statistics) , 2006 .

[15]  Bernard De Baets,et al.  Cyclic Evaluation of Transitivity of Reciprocal Relations , 2006, Soc. Choice Welf..

[16]  B. De Baets,et al.  On the Cycle-Transitivity of the Dice Model , 2003 .

[17]  B. Baets,et al.  Extreme Copulas and the Comparison of Ordered Lists , 2007 .

[18]  Bonifacio Llamazares,et al.  Aggregation of fuzzy preferences: Some rules of the mean , 2000, Soc. Choice Welf..