Mathematical economics

Mathematical economics is the application of mathematical methods to represent theories and

analyze problems in economics. Often, these applied methods are beyond simple geometry, and may
include differential and integral calculus, difference and differential equations, matrix algebra,
mathematical programming, or other computational methods.[1][2] Proponents of this approach claim
that it allows the formulation of theoretical relationships with rigor, generality, and simplicity.[3]

Mathematics allows economists to form meaningful, testable propositions about wide-ranging and
complex subjects which could less easily be expressed informally. Further, the language of
mathematics allows economists to make specific, positive claims about controversial or contentious
subjects that would be impossible without mathematics.[4] Much of economic theory is currently
presented in terms of mathematical economic models, a set of stylized and simplified mathematical
relationships asserted to clarify assumptions and implications.[5]

Broad applications include:

optimization problems as to goal equilibrium, whether of a household, business firm, or policy

maker
static (or equilibrium) analysis in which the economic unit (such as a household) or economic
system (such as a market or the economy) is modeled as not changing
comparative statics as to a change from one equilibrium to another induced by a change in one or
more factors
dynamic analysis, tracing changes in an economic system over time, for example from economic
growth.[2][6][7]

Formal economic modeling began in the 19th century with the use of differential calculus to represent
and explain economic behavior, such as utility maximization, an early economic application of
mathematical optimization. Economics became more mathematical as a discipline throughout the
first half of the 20th century, but introduction of new and generalized techniques in the period around
the Second World War, as in game theory, would greatly broaden the use of mathematical
formulations in economics.[8][7]

This rapid systematizing of economics alarmed critics of the discipline as well as some noted
economists. John Maynard Keynes, Robert Heilbroner, Friedrich Hayek and others have criticized the
broad use of mathematical models for human behavior, arguing that some human choices are
irreducible to mathematics.

History
The use of mathematics in the service of social and economic analysis dates back to the 17th century.
Then, mainly in German universities, a style of instruction emerged which dealt specifically with
detailed presentation of data as it related to public administration. Gottfried Achenwall lectured in
this fashion, coining the term statistics. At the same time, a small group of professors in England
established a method of "reasoning by figures upon things relating to government" and referred to
this practice as Political Arithmetick.[9] Sir William Petty wrote at length on issues that would later
concern economists, such as taxation, Velocity of money and national income, but while his analysis
was numerical, he rejected abstract mathematical methodology. Petty's use of detailed numerical data
(along with John Graunt) would influence statisticians and economists for some time, even though
Petty's works were largely ignored by English scholars.[10]

The mathematization of economics began in earnest in the 19th century. Most of the economic
analysis of the time was what would later be called classical economics. Subjects were discussed and
dispensed with through algebraic means, but calculus was not used. More importantly, until Johann
Heinrich von Thünen's The Isolated State in 1826, economists did not develop explicit and abstract
models for behavior in order to apply the tools of mathematics. Thünen's model of farmland use
represents the first example of marginal analysis.[11] Thünen's work was largely theoretical, but he
also mined empirical data in order to attempt to support his generalizations. In comparison to his
contemporaries, Thünen built economic models and tools, rather than applying previous tools to new
problems.[12]

Meanwhile, a new cohort of scholars trained in the mathematical methods of the physical sciences
gravitated to economics, advocating and applying those methods to their subject,[13] and described
today as moving from geometry to mechanics.[14] These included W.S. Jevons who presented paper
on a "general mathematical theory of political economy" in 1862, providing an outline for use of the
theory of marginal utility in political economy.[15] In 1871, he published The Principles of Political
Economy, declaring that the subject as science "must be mathematical simply because it deals with
quantities". Jevons expected that only collection of statistics for price and quantities would permit the
subject as presented to become an exact science.[16] Others preceded and followed in expanding
mathematical representations of economic problems. [17]

Marginalists and the roots of neoclassical economics

Augustin Cournot and Léon Walras built the tools of the

discipline axiomatically around utility, arguing that
individuals sought to maximize their utility across choices
in a way that could be described mathematically.[18] At the
time, it was thought that utility was quantifiable, in units
known as utils.[19] Cournot, Walras and Francis Ysidro
Edgeworth are considered the precursors to modern
mathematical economics.[20]

Augustin Cournot

Cournot, a professor of mathematics, developed a

mathematical treatment in 1838 for duopoly—a market
condition defined by competition between two sellers.[20] Equilibrium quantities as a solution to two
This treatment of competition, first published in reaction functions in Cournot duopoly. Each
Researches into the Mathematical Principles of reaction function is expressed as a linear
Wealth,[21] is referred to as Cournot duopoly. It is equation dependent upon quantity
assumed that both sellers had equal access to the market demanded.
and could produce their goods without cost. Further, it
assumed that both goods were homogeneous. Each seller
would vary her output based on the output of the other and the market price would be determined by
the total quantity supplied. The profit for each firm would be determined by multiplying their output
by the per unit market price. Differentiating the profit function with respect to quantity supplied for
each firm left a system of linear equations, the simultaneous solution of which gave the equilibrium
quantity, price and profits.[22] Cournot's contributions to the mathematization of economics would be
neglected for decades, but eventually influenced many of the marginalists.[22][23] Cournot's models of
duopoly and oligopoly also represent one of the first formulations of non-cooperative games. Today
the solution can be given as a Nash equilibrium but Cournot's work preceded modern game theory by
over 100 years.[24]

Léon Walras

While Cournot provided a solution for what would later be called partial equilibrium, Léon Walras
attempted to formalize discussion of the economy as a whole through a theory of general competitive
equilibrium. The behavior of every economic actor would be considered on both the production and
consumption side. Walras originally presented four separate models of exchange, each recursively
included in the next. The solution of the resulting system of equations (both linear and non-linear) is
the general equilibrium.[25] At the time, no general solution could be expressed for a system of
arbitrarily many equations, but Walras's attempts produced two famous results in economics. The
first is Walras' law and the second is the principle of tâtonnement. Walras' method was considered
highly mathematical for the time and Edgeworth commented at length about this fact in his review of
Éléments d'économie politique pure (Elements of Pure Economics).[26]

Walras' law was introduced as a theoretical answer to the problem of determining the solutions in
general equilibrium. His notation is different from modern notation but can be constructed using
more modern summation notation. Walras assumed that in equilibrium, all money would be spent on
all goods: every good would be sold at the market price for that good and every buyer would expend
their last dollar on a basket of goods. Starting from this assumption, Walras could then show that if
there were n markets and n-1 markets cleared (reached equilibrium conditions) that the nth market
would clear as well. This is easiest to visualize with two markets (considered in most texts as a market
for goods and a market for money). If one of two markets has reached an equilibrium state, no
additional goods (or conversely, money) can enter or exit the second market, so it must be in a state of
equilibrium as well. Walras used this statement to move toward a proof of existence of solutions to
general equilibrium but it is commonly used today to illustrate market clearing in money markets at
the undergraduate level.[27]

Tâtonnement (roughly, French for groping toward) was meant to serve as the practical expression of
Walrasian general equilibrium. Walras abstracted the marketplace as an auction of goods where the
auctioneer would call out prices and market participants would wait until they could each satisfy their
personal reservation prices for the quantity desired (remembering here that this is an auction on all
goods, so everyone has a reservation price for their desired basket of goods).[28]

Only when all buyers are satisfied with the given market price would transactions occur. The market
would "clear" at that price—no surplus or shortage would exist. The word tâtonnement is used to
describe the directions the market takes in groping toward equilibrium, settling high or low prices on
different goods until a price is agreed upon for all goods. While the process appears dynamic, Walras
only presented a static model, as no transactions would occur until all markets were in equilibrium. In
practice, very few markets operate in this manner.[29]

Francis Ysidro Edgeworth

Edgeworth introduced mathematical elements to Economics explicitly in Mathematical Psychics: An
Essay on the Application of Mathematics to the Moral Sciences, published in 1881.[30] He adopted
Jeremy Bentham's felicific calculus to economic behavior, allowing the outcome of each decision to be
converted into a change in utility.[31] Using this assumption, Edgeworth built a model of exchange on
three assumptions: individuals are self-interested, individuals act to maximize utility, and individuals
are "free to recontract with another independently of...any third party".[32]

Given two individuals, the set of solutions

where both individuals can maximize utility is
described by the contract curve on what is now
known as an Edgeworth Box. Technically, the
construction of the two-person solution to
Edgeworth's problem was not developed
graphically until 1924 by Arthur Lyon
Bowley.[34] The contract curve of the
Edgeworth box (or more generally on any set of
solutions to Edgeworth's problem for more
actors) is referred to as the core of an
economy.[35]

Edgeworth devoted considerable effort to

insisting that mathematical proofs were An Edgeworth box displaying the contract curve on an
appropriate for all schools of thought in economy with two participants. Referred to as the "core" of
economics. While at the helm of The Economic the economy in modern parlance, there are infinitely many
Journal, he published several articles criticizing solutions along the curve for economies with two
the mathematical rigor of rival researchers, participants[33]
including Edwin Robert Anderson Seligman, a
noted skeptic of mathematical economics.[36]
The articles focused on a back and forth over tax incidence and responses by producers. Edgeworth
noticed that a monopoly producing a good that had jointness of supply but not jointness of demand
(such as first class and economy on an airplane, if the plane flies, both sets of seats fly with it) might
actually lower the price seen by the consumer for one of the two commodities if a tax were applied.
Common sense and more traditional, numerical analysis seemed to indicate that this was
preposterous. Seligman insisted that the results Edgeworth achieved were a quirk of his mathematical
formulation. He suggested that the assumption of a continuous demand function and an infinitesimal
change in the tax resulted in the paradoxical predictions. Harold Hotelling later showed that
Edgeworth was correct and that the same result (a "diminution of price as a result of the tax") could
occur with a discontinuous demand function and large changes in the tax rate.[37]

Modern mathematical economics

From the later-1930s, an array of new mathematical tools from the differential calculus and
differential equations, convex sets, and graph theory were deployed to advance economic theory in a
way similar to new mathematical methods earlier applied to physics.[8][38] The process was later
described as moving from mechanics to axiomatics.[39]

Differential calculus
Vilfredo Pareto analyzed microeconomics by treating decisions by economic actors as attempts to
change a given allotment of goods to another, more preferred allotment. Sets of allocations could then
be treated as Pareto efficient (Pareto optimal is an equivalent term) when no exchanges could occur
between actors that could make at least one individual better off without making any other individual
worse off.[40] Pareto's proof is commonly conflated with Walrassian equilibrium or informally
ascribed to Adam Smith's Invisible hand hypothesis.[41] Rather, Pareto's statement was the first
formal assertion of what would be known as the first fundamental theorem of welfare economics.[42]
These models lacked the inequalities of the next generation of mathematical economics.

In the landmark treatise Foundations of Economic Analysis (1947), Paul Samuelson identified a
common paradigm and mathematical structure across multiple fields in the subject, building on
previous work by Alfred Marshall. Foundations took mathematical concepts from physics and applied
them to economic problems. This broad view (for example, comparing Le Chatelier's principle to
tâtonnement) drives the fundamental premise of mathematical economics: systems of economic
actors may be modeled and their behavior described much like any other system. This extension
followed on the work of the marginalists in the previous century and extended it significantly.
Samuelson approached the problems of applying individual utility maximization over aggregate
groups with comparative statics, which compares two different equilibrium states after an exogenous
change in a variable. This and other methods in the book provided the foundation for mathematical
economics in the 20th century.[7][43]

Linear models

Restricted models of general equilibrium were formulated by John von Neumann in 1937.[44] Unlike
earlier versions, the models of von Neumann had inequality constraints. For his model of an
expanding economy, von Neumann proved the existence and uniqueness of an equilibrium using his
generalization of Brouwer's fixed point theorem. Von Neumann's model of an expanding economy
considered the matrix pencil  A - λ B with nonnegative matrices  A and B; von Neumann sought
probability vectors p and q and a positive number λ that would solve the complementarity equation

pT (A − λ B) q = 0,

along with two inequality systems expressing economic efficiency. In this model, the (transposed)
probability vector p represents the prices of the goods while the probability vector q represents the
"intensity" at which the production process would run. The unique solution λ represents the rate of
growth of the economy, which equals the interest rate. Proving the existence of a positive growth rate
and proving that the growth rate equals the interest rate were remarkable achievements, even for von
Neumann.[45][46][47] Von Neumann's results have been viewed as a special case of linear
programming, where von Neumann's model uses only nonnegative matrices.[48] The study of von
Neumann's model of an expanding economy continues to interest mathematical economists with
interests in computational economics.[49][50][51]

Input-output economics

In 1936, the Russian–born economist Wassily Leontief built his model of input-output analysis from
the 'material balance' tables constructed by Soviet economists, which themselves followed earlier
work by the physiocrats. With his model, which described a system of production and demand
processes, Leontief described how changes in demand in one economic sector would influence
production in another.[52] In practice, Leontief estimated the coefficients of his simple models, to
address economically interesting questions. In production economics, "Leontief technologies"
produce outputs using constant proportions of inputs, regardless of the price of inputs, reducing the
value of Leontief models for understanding economies but allowing their parameters to be estimated
relatively easily. In contrast, the von Neumann model of an expanding economy allows for choice of
techniques, but the coefficients must be estimated for each technology.[53][54]

Mathematical optimization

In mathematics, mathematical optimization (or optimization or

mathematical programming) refers to the selection of a best
element from some set of available alternatives.[55] In the simplest
case, an optimization problem involves maximizing or minimizing
a real function by selecting input values of the function and
computing the corresponding values of the function. The solution
process includes satisfying general necessary and sufficient
conditions for optimality. For optimization problems, specialized
notation may be used as to the function and its input(s). More Red dot in z direction as maximum
generally, optimization includes finding the best available element for paraboloid function of (x, y)
of some function given a defined domain and may use a variety of inputs
different computational optimization techniques.[56]

Economics is closely enough linked to optimization by agents in an economy that an influential

definition relatedly describes economics qua science as the "study of human behavior as a
relationship between ends and scarce means" with alternative uses.[57] Optimization problems run
through modern economics, many with explicit economic or technical constraints. In
microeconomics, the utility maximization problem and its dual problem, the expenditure
minimization problem for a given level of utility, are economic optimization problems.[58] Theory
posits that consumers maximize their utility, subject to their budget constraints and that firms
maximize their profits, subject to their production functions, input costs, and market demand.[59]

Economic equilibrium is studied in optimization theory as a key ingredient of economic theorems that
in principle could be tested against empirical data.[7][60] Newer developments have occurred in
dynamic programming and modeling optimization with risk and uncertainty, including applications
to portfolio theory, the economics of information, and search theory.[59]

Optimality properties for an entire market system may be stated in mathematical terms, as in
formulation of the two fundamental theorems of welfare economics[61] and in the Arrow–Debreu
model of general equilibrium (also discussed below).[62] More concretely, many problems are
amenable to analytical (formulaic) solution. Many others may be sufficiently complex to require
numerical methods of solution, aided by software.[56] Still others are complex but tractable enough to
allow computable methods of solution, in particular computable general equilibrium models for the
entire economy.[63]

Linear and nonlinear programming have profoundly affected microeconomics, which had earlier
considered only equality constraints.[64] Many of the mathematical economists who received Nobel
Prizes in Economics had conducted notable research using linear programming: Leonid Kantorovich,
Leonid Hurwicz, Tjalling Koopmans, Kenneth J. Arrow, Robert Dorfman, Paul Samuelson and Robert
Solow.[65] Both Kantorovich and Koopmans acknowledged that George B. Dantzig deserved to share
their Nobel Prize for linear programming. Economists who conducted research in nonlinear
programming also have won the Nobel prize, notably Ragnar Frisch in addition to Kantorovich,
Hurwicz, Koopmans, Arrow, and Samuelson.

Linear optimization

Linear programming was developed to aid the allocation of resources in firms and in industries
during the 1930s in Russia and during the 1940s in the United States. During the Berlin airlift (1948),
linear programming was used to plan the shipment of supplies to prevent Berlin from starving after
the Soviet blockade.[66][67]

Nonlinear programming

Extensions to nonlinear optimization with inequality constraints were achieved in 1951 by Albert W.
Tucker and Harold Kuhn, who considered the nonlinear optimization problem:

Minimize subject to and where

is the function to be minimized
are the functions of the inequality constraints where
are the functions of the equality constraints where .

In allowing inequality constraints, the Kuhn–Tucker approach generalized the classic method of
Lagrange multipliers, which (until then) had allowed only equality constraints.[68] The Kuhn–Tucker
approach inspired further research on Lagrangian duality, including the treatment of inequality
constraints.[69][70] The duality theory of nonlinear programming is particularly satisfactory when
applied to convex minimization problems, which enjoy the convex-analytic duality theory of Fenchel
and Rockafellar; this convex duality is particularly strong for polyhedral convex functions, such as
those arising in linear programming. Lagrangian duality and convex analysis are used daily in
operations research, in the scheduling of power plants, the planning of production schedules for
factories, and the routing of airlines (routes, flights, planes, crews).[70]

Variational calculus and optimal control

Economic dynamics allows for changes in economic variables over time, including in dynamic
systems. The problem of finding optimal functions for such changes is studied in variational calculus
and in optimal control theory. Before the Second World War, Frank Ramsey and Harold Hotelling
used the calculus of variations to that end.

Following Richard Bellman's work on dynamic programming and the 1962 English translation of L.
Pontryagin et al.'s earlier work,[71] optimal control theory was used more extensively in economics in
addressing dynamic problems, especially as to economic growth equilibrium and stability of economic
systems,[72] of which a textbook example is optimal consumption and saving.[73] A crucial distinction
is between deterministic and stochastic control models.[74] Other applications of optimal control
theory include those in finance, inventories, and production for example.[75]

Functional analysis
It was in the course of proving of the existence of an optimal equilibrium in his 1937 model of
economic growth that John von Neumann introduced functional analytic methods to include topology
in economic theory, in particular, fixed-point theory through his generalization of Brouwer's fixed-
point theorem.[8][44][76] Following von Neumann's program, Kenneth Arrow and Gérard Debreu
formulated abstract models of economic equilibria using convex sets and fixed–point theory. In
introducing the Arrow–Debreu model in 1954, they proved the existence (but not the uniqueness) of
an equilibrium and also proved that every Walras equilibrium is Pareto efficient; in general, equilibria
need not be unique.[77] In their models, the ("primal") vector space represented quantities while the
"dual" vector space represented prices.[78]

In Russia, the mathematician Leonid Kantorovich developed economic models in partially ordered
vector spaces, that emphasized the duality between quantities and prices.[79] Kantorovich renamed
prices as "objectively determined valuations" which were abbreviated in Russian as "o. o. o.", alluding
to the difficulty of discussing prices in the Soviet Union.[78][80][81]

Even in finite dimensions, the concepts of functional analysis have illuminated economic theory,
particularly in clarifying the role of prices as normal vectors to a hyperplane supporting a convex set,
representing production or consumption possibilities. However, problems of describing optimization
over time or under uncertainty require the use of infinite–dimensional function spaces, because
agents are choosing among functions or stochastic processes.[78][82][83][84]

Differential decline and rise

John von Neumann's work on functional analysis and topology broke new ground in mathematics and
economic theory.[44][85] It also left advanced mathematical economics with fewer applications of
differential calculus. In particular, general equilibrium theorists used general topology, convex
geometry, and optimization theory more than differential calculus, because the approach of
differential calculus had failed to establish the existence of an equilibrium.

However, the decline of differential calculus should not be exaggerated, because differential calculus
has always been used in graduate training and in applications. Moreover, differential calculus has
returned to the highest levels of mathematical economics, general equilibrium theory (GET), as
practiced by the "GET-set" (the humorous designation due to Jacques H. Drèze). In the 1960s and
1970s, however, Gérard Debreu and Stephen Smale led a revival of the use of differential calculus in
mathematical economics. In particular, they were able to prove the existence of a general equilibrium,
where earlier writers had failed, because of their novel mathematics: Baire category from general
topology and Sard's lemma from differential topology. Other economists associated with the use of
differential analysis include Egbert Dierker, Andreu Mas-Colell, and Yves Balasko.[86][87] These
advances have changed the traditional narrative of the history of mathematical economics, following
von Neumann, which celebrated the abandonment of differential calculus.

Game theory

John von Neumann, working with Oskar Morgenstern on the theory of games, broke new
mathematical ground in 1944 by extending functional analytic methods related to convex sets and
topological fixed-point theory to economic analysis.[8][85] Their work thereby avoided the traditional
differential calculus, for which the maximum–operator did not apply to non-differentiable functions.
Continuing von Neumann's work in cooperative game theory, game theorists Lloyd S. Shapley, Martin
Shubik, Hervé Moulin, Nimrod Megiddo, Bezalel Peleg influenced economic research in politics and
economics. For example, research on the fair prices in cooperative games and fair values for voting
games led to changed rules for voting in legislatures and for accounting for the costs in public–works
projects. For example, cooperative game theory was used in designing the water distribution system
of Southern Sweden and for setting rates for dedicated telephone lines in the USA.

Earlier neoclassical theory had bounded only the range of bargaining outcomes and in special cases,
for example bilateral monopoly or along the contract curve of the Edgeworth box.[88] Von Neumann
and Morgenstern's results were similarly weak. Following von Neumann's program, however, John
Nash used fixed–point theory to prove conditions under which the bargaining problem and
noncooperative games can generate a unique equilibrium solution.[89] Noncooperative game theory
has been adopted as a fundamental aspect of experimental economics,[90] behavioral economics,[91]
information economics,[92] industrial organization,[93] and political economy.[94] It has also given
rise to the subject of mechanism design (sometimes called reverse game theory), which has private
and public-policy applications as to ways of improving economic efficiency through incentives for
information sharing.[95]

In 1994, Nash, John Harsanyi, and Reinhard Selten received the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic
Sciences their work on non–cooperative games. Harsanyi and Selten were awarded for their work on
repeated games. Later work extended their results to computational methods of modeling.[96]

Agent-based computational economics

Agent-based computational economics (ACE) as a named field is relatively recent, dating from about
the 1990s as to published work. It studies economic processes, including whole economies, as
dynamic systems of interacting agents over time. As such, it falls in the paradigm of complex adaptive
systems.[97] In corresponding agent-based models, agents are not real people but "computational
objects modeled as interacting according to rules" ... "whose micro-level interactions create emergent
patterns" in space and time.[98] The rules are formulated to predict behavior and social interactions
based on incentives and information. The theoretical assumption of mathematical optimization by
agents markets is replaced by the less restrictive postulate of agents with bounded rationality
adapting to market forces.[99]

ACE models apply numerical methods of analysis to computer-based simulations of complex dynamic
problems for which more conventional methods, such as theorem formulation, may not find ready
use.[100] Starting from specified initial conditions, the computational economic system is modeled as
evolving over time as its constituent agents repeatedly interact with each other. In these respects, ACE
has been characterized as a bottom-up culture-dish approach to the study of the economy.[101] In
contrast to other standard modeling methods, ACE events are driven solely by initial conditions,
whether or not equilibria exist or are computationally tractable. ACE modeling, however, includes
agent adaptation, autonomy, and learning.[102] It has a similarity to, and overlap with, game theory as
an agent-based method for modeling social interactions.[96] Other dimensions of the approach
include such standard economic subjects as competition and collaboration,[103] market structure and
industrial organization,[104] transaction costs,[105] welfare economics[106] and mechanism design,[95]
information and uncertainty,[107] and macroeconomics.[108][109]

The method is said to benefit from continuing improvements in modeling techniques of computer
science and increased computer capabilities. Issues include those common to experimental economics
in general[110] and by comparison[111] and to development of a common framework for empirical
validation and resolving open questions in agent-based modeling.[112] The ultimate scientific objective
of the method has been described as "test[ing] theoretical findings against real-world data in ways
that permit empirically supported theories to cumulate over time, with each researcher's work
building appropriately on the work that has gone before".[113]

Mathematicization of economics
Over the course of the 20th century, articles in "core
journals"[115] in economics have been almost exclusively
written by economists in academia. As a result, much of
the material transmitted in those journals relates to
economic theory, and "economic theory itself has been
continuously more abstract and mathematical."[116] A
subjective assessment of mathematical techniques[117]
employed in these core journals showed a decrease in
articles that use neither geometric representations nor
mathematical notation from 95% in 1892 to 5.3% in
1990.[118] A 2007 survey of ten of the top economic
journals finds that only  5.8% of the articles published in
2003 and 2004 both lacked statistical analysis of data and
lacked displayed mathematical expressions that were The surface of the Volatility smile is a 3-D
indexed with numbers at the margin of the page.[119] surface whereby the current market implied
volatility (Z-axis) for all options on the
underlier is plotted against strike price and
Econometrics time to maturity (X & Y-axes).[114]

Between the world wars, advances in mathematical

statistics and a cadre of mathematically trained economists led to econometrics, which was the name
proposed for the discipline of advancing economics by using mathematics and statistics. Within
economics, "econometrics" has often been used for statistical methods in economics, rather than
mathematical economics. Statistical econometrics features the application of linear regression and
time series analysis to economic data.

Ragnar Frisch coined the word "econometrics" and helped to found both the Econometric Society in
1930 and the journal Econometrica in 1933.[120][121] A student of Frisch's, Trygve Haavelmo
published The Probability Approach in Econometrics in 1944, where he asserted that precise
statistical analysis could be used as a tool to validate mathematical theories about economic actors
with data from complex sources.[122] This linking of statistical analysis of systems to economic theory
was also promulgated by the Cowles Commission (now the Cowles Foundation) throughout the 1930s
and 1940s.[123]

The roots of modern econometrics can be traced to the American economist Henry L. Moore. Moore
studied agricultural productivity and attempted to fit changing values of productivity for plots of corn
and other crops to a curve using different values of elasticity. Moore made several errors in his work,
some from his choice of models and some from limitations in his use of mathematics. The accuracy of
Moore's models also was limited by the poor data for national accounts in the United States at the
time. While his first models of production were static, in 1925 he published a dynamic "moving
equilibrium" model designed to explain business cycles—this periodic variation from over-correction
in supply and demand curves is now known as the cobweb model. A more formal derivation of this
model was made later by Nicholas Kaldor, who is largely credited for its exposition.[124]

Application
Much of classical economics can be presented in
simple geometric terms or elementary mathematical
notation. Mathematical economics, however,
conventionally makes use of calculus and matrix
algebra in economic analysis in order to make
powerful claims that would be more difficult without
such mathematical tools. These tools are prerequisites
for formal study, not only in mathematical economics
but in contemporary economic theory in general.
Economic problems often involve so many variables
that mathematics is the only practical way of attacking
and solving them. Alfred Marshall argued that every
economic problem which can be quantified,
analytically expressed and solved, should be treated by
means of mathematical work.[126]

Economics has become increasingly dependent upon The IS/LM model is a Keynesian macroeconomic
mathematical methods and the mathematical tools it model designed to make predictions about the
employs have become more sophisticated. As a result, intersection of "real" economic activity (e.g.
mathematics has become considerably more important spending, income, savings rates) and decisions
to professionals in economics and finance. Graduate made in the financial markets (Money supply and
programs in both economics and finance require Liquidity preference). The model is no longer
strong undergraduate preparation in mathematics for widely taught at the graduate level but is common
admission and, for this reason, attract an increasingly in undergraduate macroeconomics courses.[125]
high number of mathematicians. Applied
mathematicians apply mathematical principles to
practical problems, such as economic analysis and other economics-related issues, and many
economic problems are often defined as integrated into the scope of applied mathematics.[18]

This integration results from the formulation of economic problems as stylized models with clear
assumptions and falsifiable predictions. This modeling may be informal or prosaic, as it was in Adam
Smith's The Wealth of Nations, or it may be formal, rigorous and mathematical.

Broadly speaking, formal economic models may be classified as stochastic or deterministic and as
discrete or continuous. At a practical level, quantitative modeling is applied to many areas of
economics and several methodologies have evolved more or less independently of each other.[127]

Stochastic models are formulated using stochastic processes. They model economically
observable values over time. Most of econometrics is based on statistics to formulate and test
hypotheses about these processes or estimate parameters for them. Between the World Wars,
Herman Wold developed a representation of stationary stochastic processes in terms of
autoregressive models and a determinist trend. Wold and Jan Tinbergen applied time-series
analysis to economic data. Contemporary research on time series statistics consider additional
formulations of stationary processes, such as autoregressive moving average models. More
 general models include autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARCH) models and
generalized ARCH (GARCH) models.
Non-stochastic mathematical models may be purely qualitative (for example, models involved in
some aspect of social choice theory) or quantitative (involving rationalization of financial variables,
for example with hyperbolic coordinates, and/or specific forms of functional relationships between
variables). In some cases economic predictions of a model merely assert the direction of
movement of economic variables, and so the functional relationships are used only in a qualitative
sense: for example, if the price of an item increases, then the demand for that item will decrease.
For such models, economists often use two-dimensional graphs instead of functions.
Qualitative models are occasionally used. One example is qualitative scenario planning in which
possible future events are played out. Another example is non-numerical decision tree analysis.
Qualitative models often suffer from lack of precision.

Example: The effect of a corporate tax cut on wages

The great appeal of mathematical economics is that it brings a degree of rigor to economic thinking,
particularly around charged political topics. For example, during the discussion of the efficacy of a
corporate tax cut for increasing the wages of workers, a simple mathematical model proved beneficial
to understanding the issues at hand.

As an intellectual exercise, the following problem was posed by Prof. Greg Mankiw of Harvard
University:[128]

An open economy has the production function , where is output

per worker and is capital per worker. The capital stock adjusts so that the
after-tax marginal product of capital equals the exogenously given world
interest rate ...How much will the tax cut increase wages?

To answer this question, we follow John H. Cochrane of the Hoover Institution.[129] Suppose an open
economy has the production function:

Where the variables in this equation are:

is the total output

is the production function
is the total capital stock
is the total labor stock

The standard choice for the production function is the Cobb-Douglas production function:

where is the factor of productivity - assumed to be a constant. A corporate tax cut in this model is
equivalent to a tax on capital. With taxes, firms look to maximize:
where is the capital tax rate, is wages per worker, and is the exogenous interest rate. Then the
first-order optimality conditions become:

Therefore, the optimality conditions imply that:

Define total taxes . This implies that taxes per worker are:

Then the change in taxes per worker, given the tax rate, is:

To find the change in wages, we differentiate the second optimality condition for the per worker
wages to obtain:

Assuming that the interest rate is fixed at , so that , we may differentiate the first
optimality condition for the interest rate to find:

For the moment, let's focus only on the static effect of a capital tax cut, so that . If we
substitute this equation into equation for wage changes with respect to the tax rate, then we find that:

Therefore, the static effect of a capital tax cut on wages is:

Based on the model, it seems possible that we may achieve a rise in the wage of a worker greater than
the amount of the tax cut. But that only considers the static effect, and we know that the dynamic
effect must be accounted for. In the dynamic model, we may rewrite the equation for changes in taxes
per worker with respect to the tax rate as:
Recalling that , we have that:

Using the Cobb-Douglas production function, we have that:

Therefore, the dynamic effect of a capital tax cut on wages is:

If we take , then the dynamic effect of lowering capital taxes on wages will be even larger
than the static effect. Moreover, if there are positive externalities to capital accumulation, the effect of
the tax cut on wages would be larger than in the model we just derived. It is important to note that the
result is a combination of:

1. The standard result that in a small open economy labor bears 100% of a small capital income tax
2. The fact that, starting at a positive tax rate, the burden of a tax increase exceeds revenue
collection due to the first-order deadweight loss

This result showing that, under certain assumptions, a corporate tax cut can boost the wages of
workers by more than the lost revenue does not imply that the magnitude is correct. Rather, it
suggests a basis for policy analysis that is not grounded in handwaving. If the assumptions are
reasonable, then the model is an acceptable approximation of reality; if they are not, then better
models should be developed.

CES production function

Now let's assume that instead of the Cobb-Douglas production function we have a more general
constant elasticity of substitution (CES) production function:
where ; is the elasticity of substitution between capital and labor. The relevant quantity
we want to calculate is , which may be derived as:

Therefore, we may use this to find that:

Therefore, under a general CES model, the dynamic effect of a capital tax cut on wages is:

We recover the Cobb-Douglas solution when . When , which is the case when perfect
substitutes exist, we find that - there is no effect of changes in capital taxes on wages. And
when , which is the case when perfect complements exist, we find that - a cut
in capital taxes increases wages by exactly one dollar.

Criticisms and defences

Adequacy of mathematics for qualitative and complicated economics

The Austrian school — while making many of the same normative economic arguments as
mainstream economists from marginalist traditions, such as the Chicago school — differs
methodologically from mainstream neoclassical schools of economics, in particular in their sharp
critiques of the mathematization of economics.[130] Friedrich Hayek contended that the use of formal
techniques projects a scientific exactness that does not appropriately account for informational
limitations faced by real economic agents. [131]

In an interview in 1999, the economic historian Robert Heilbroner stated:[132]

I guess the scientific approach began to penetrate and soon dominate the profession in the
past twenty to thirty years. This came about in part because of the "invention" of
mathematical analysis of various kinds and, indeed, considerable improvements in it. This
is the age in which we have not only more data but more sophisticated use of data. So
there is a strong feeling that this is a data-laden science and a data-laden undertaking,
which, by virtue of the sheer numerics, the sheer equations, and the sheer look of a journal
page, bears a certain resemblance to science . . . That one central activity looks scientific. I
understand that. I think that is genuine. It approaches being a universal law. But
resembling a science is different from being a science.
Heilbroner stated that "some/much of economics is not naturally quantitative and therefore does not
lend itself to mathematical exposition."[133]

Testing predictions of mathematical economics

Philosopher Karl Popper discussed the scientific standing of economics in the 1940s and 1950s. He
argued that mathematical economics suffered from being tautological. In other words, insofar as
economics became a mathematical theory, mathematical economics ceased to rely on empirical
refutation but rather relied on mathematical proofs and disproof.[134] According to Popper, falsifiable
assumptions can be tested by experiment and observation while unfalsifiable assumptions can be
explored mathematically for their consequences and for their consistency with other assumptions.[135]

Sharing Popper's concerns about assumptions in economics generally, and not just mathematical
economics, Milton Friedman declared that "all assumptions are unrealistic". Friedman proposed
judging economic models by their predictive performance rather than by the match between their
assumptions and reality.[136]

Mathematical economics as a form of pure mathematics

Considering mathematical economics, J.M. Keynes wrote in The General Theory:[137]

It is a great fault of symbolic pseudo-mathematical methods of formalising a system of

economic analysis ... that they expressly assume strict independence between the factors
involved and lose their cogency and authority if this hypothesis is disallowed; whereas, in
ordinary discourse, where we are not blindly manipulating and know all the time what we
are doing and what the words mean, we can keep ‘at the back of our heads’ the necessary
reserves and qualifications and the adjustments which we shall have to make later on, in a
way in which we cannot keep complicated partial differentials ‘at the back’ of several pages
of algebra which assume they all vanish. Too large a proportion of recent ‘mathematical’
economics are merely concoctions, as imprecise as the initial assumptions they rest on,
which allow the author to lose sight of the complexities and interdependencies of the real
world in a maze of pretentious and unhelpful symbols.

Defense of mathematical economics

In response to these criticisms, Paul Samuelson argued that mathematics is a language, repeating a
thesis of Josiah Willard Gibbs. In economics, the language of mathematics is sometimes necessary for
representing substantive problems. Moreover, mathematical economics has led to conceptual
advances in economics.[138] In particular, Samuelson gave the example of microeconomics, writing
that "few people are ingenious enough to grasp [its] more complex parts... without resorting to the
language of mathematics, while most ordinary individuals can do so fairly easily with the aid of
mathematics."[139]

Some economists state that mathematical economics deserves support just like other forms of
mathematics, particularly its neighbors in mathematical optimization and mathematical statistics and
increasingly in theoretical computer science. Mathematical economics and other mathematical
sciences have a history in which theoretical advances have regularly contributed to the reform of the
more applied branches of economics. In particular, following the program of John von Neumann,
game theory now provides the foundations for describing much of applied economics, from statistical
decision theory (as "games against nature") and econometrics to general equilibrium theory and
industrial organization. In the last decade, with the rise of the internet, mathematical economists and
optimization experts and computer scientists have worked on problems of pricing for on-line services
--- their contributions using mathematics from cooperative game theory, nondifferentiable
optimization, and combinatorial games.

Robert M. Solow concluded that mathematical economics was the core "infrastructure" of
contemporary economics:

Economics is no longer a fit conversation piece for ladies and gentlemen. It has become a
technical subject. Like any technical subject it attracts some people who are more
interested in the technique than the subject. That is too bad, but it may be inevitable. In
any case, do not kid yourself: the technical core of economics is indispensable
infrastructure for the political economy. That is why, if you consult [a reference in
contemporary economics] looking for enlightenment about the world today, you will be led
to technical economics, or history, or nothing at all.[140]

Mathematical economists
Prominent mathematical economists include the following.

19th century
Enrico Barone Irving Fisher Vilfredo Pareto
Antoine Augustin Cournot William Stanley Jevons Léon Walras
Francis Ysidro Edgeworth

20th century
Charalambos D. Roger Guesnerie Nimrod Megiddo Reinhard Selten
Aliprantis Frank Hahn Jean-François Amartya Sen
R. G. D. Allen John C. Harsanyi Mertens Lloyd S. Shapley
Maurice Allais John R. Hicks James Mirrlees Stephen Smale
Kenneth J. Arrow Werner Roger Myerson Robert Solow
Robert J. Aumann Hildenbrand John Forbes Nash, Hugo F.
Yves Balasko Harold Hotelling Jr. Sonnenschein
David Blackwell Leonid Hurwicz John von Neumann Nancy L. Stokey
Lawrence E. Blume Leonid Edward C. Prescott Albert W. Tucker
Graciela Chichilnisky Kantorovich Roy Radner Hirofumi Uzawa
George B. Dantzig Tjalling Frank Ramsey Robert B. Wilson
Koopmans Donald John
Gérard Debreu Abraham Wald
David M. Kreps Roberts
Mario Draghi Hermann Wold
Harold W. Kuhn Paul Samuelson
Jacques H. Drèze Nicholas C. Yannelis
 David Gale Edmond Yuliy Sannikov
Nicholas Georgescu- Malinvaud Thomas Sargent
Roegen Andreu Mas- Leonard J. Savage
Colell Herbert Scarf
Eric Maskin

See also
Business and
economics portal
Mathematics portal

Econophysics
Mathematical finance

References
1. Elaborated at the JEL classification codes, Mathematical and quantitative methods JEL: C
Subcategories.
2. Chiang, Alpha C.; Kevin Wainwright (2005). Fundamental Methods of Mathematical Economics.
McGraw-Hill Irwin. pp. 3–4. ISBN 978-0-07-010910-0. TOC. (http://www.mhprofessional.com/prod
uct.php?isbn=0070109109)
3. Debreu, Gérard ([1987] 2008). "mathematical economics", section II, The New Palgrave
Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract. (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=
pde2008_M000107&edition=current&q=Mathematical%20economics&topicid=&result_number=1)
Republished with revisions from 1986, "Theoretic Models: Mathematical Form and Economic
Content", Econometrica, 54(6), pp. 1259 (https://www.jstor.org/pss/1914299)-1270.
4. Varian, Hal (1997). "What Use Is Economic Theory?" in A. D'Autume and J. Cartelier, ed., Is
Economics Becoming a Hard Science?, Edward Elgar. Pre-publication PDF. (http://www.sims.berk
eley.edu/~hal/Papers/theory.pdf) Retrieved 2008-04-01.
 5. As in Handbook of Mathematical Economics, 1st-page chapter links:
     Arrow, Kenneth J., and Michael D. Intriligator, ed., (1981), v. 1 (http://www.sciencedirect.co
m/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%2324615%231981%23999989999%235
65707%23FLP%23&_cdi=24615&_pubType=HS&_auth=y&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&
_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=01881ea3fe7d7990fed1c5b78d9f7be6)
     _____ (1982). v. 2 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey
=%23TOC%2324615%231982%23999979999%23565708%23FLP%23&_cdi=24615&_pubTy
pe=HS&_auth=y&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=80dbd8f
22c229a3640dc02e59ff80fe4)
     _____ (1986). v. 3 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey
=%23TOC%2324615%231986%23999969999%23565709%23FLP%23&_cdi=24615&_pubTy
pe=HS&_auth=y&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=56f86ec
2f0a1d2881e15bd1d0a45accd)
     Hildenbrand, Werner, and Hugo Sonnenschein, ed. (1991). v. 4. (http://www.sciencedirect.c
om/science/handbooks/15734382)
Debreu, Gérard (1983). Mathematical Economics: Twenty Papers of Gérard Debreu, Contents
(https://books.google.com/books?id=wKJp6DepYncC&pg=PR7).
Glaister, Stephen (1984). Mathematical Methods for Economists, 3rd ed., Blackwell. Contents.
(https://books.google.com/books?id=Ct2nrJSHxsQC&pg=PR5=onepage)
Takayama, Akira (1985). Mathematical Economics, 2nd ed. Cambridge.
Description (https://books.google.com/books?id=685iPEaLAEcC) and Contents (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=685iPEaLAEcC&pg=PR9=onepage).
Michael Carter (2001). Foundations of Mathematical Economics, MIT Press. Description (http
s://web.archive.org/web/20060915230536/http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttyp
e=2&tid=8630) and Contents (https://books.google.com/books?id=KysvrGGfzq0C&pg=PR7=o
nepage).
6. Chiang, Alpha C. (1992). Elements of Dynamic Optimization, Waveland. TOC (https://web.archive.
org/web/20050211210424/http://waveland.com/Titles/Chiang.htm) & Amazon.com link (https://ww
w.amazon.com/Elements-Dynamic-Optimization-Alpha-Chiang/dp/157766096X) to inside, first pp.
7. Samuelson, Paul (1947) [1983]. Foundations of Economic Analysis. Harvard University Press.
ISBN 978-0-674-31301-9.

8. Debreu, Gérard ([1987] 2008). "mathematical economics", The New Palgrave Dictionary of
Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract. (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_
M000107&edition=current&q=Mathematical%20economics&topicid=&result_number=1)
Republished with revisions from 1986, "Theoretic Models: Mathematical Form and Economic
Content", Econometrica, 54(6), pp. 1259 (https://www.jstor.org/pss/1914299)-1270.
von Neumann, John, and Oskar Morgenstern (1944). Theory of Games and Economic
Behavior. Princeton University Press.
9. Schumpeter, J.A. (1954). Elizabeth B. Schumpeter (ed.). History of Economic Analysis (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=xjWiAAAACAAJ). New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 209–212.
ISBN 978-0-04-330086-2. OCLC 13498913 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/13498913).
10. Schumpeter (1954) p. 212-215
11. Schnieder, Erich (1934). "Johann Heinrich von Thünen". Econometrica. 2 (1): 1–12.
doi:10.2307/1907947 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F1907947). ISSN 0012-9682 (https://www.worldc
at.org/issn/0012-9682). JSTOR 1907947 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/1907947). OCLC 35705710
(https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/35705710).
12. Schumpeter (1954) p. 465-468
13. Philip Mirowski, 1991. "The When, the How and the Why of Mathematical Expression in the
History of Economics Analysis", Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1) pp. 145-157. (http://www.f
cs.edu.uy/multi/phes/mirowski_math_econ_JEP.pdf)
14. Weintraub, E. Roy (2008). "mathematics and economics", The New Palgrave Dictionary of
Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_M0
00372&edition=current&q=&topicid=&result_number=1).
15. Jevons, W.S. (1866). "Brief Account of a General Mathematical Theory of Political Economy",
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, XXIX (June) pp. 282–87. Read in Section F of the British
Association, 1862. PDF. (https://web.archive.org/web/20220622033317/http://www.adelinotorres.c
om/economia/STANLEY%20JEVONS_Teoria%20Matem%EF%BF%BDtica%20e%20Economia%
20Politica.pdf)
16. Jevons, W. Stanley (1871). The Principles of Political Economy, pp. 4, 25 (https://archive.org/detai
ls/bub_gb_Sw8ZAAAAYAAJ). Macmillan. "The Theory of Political Economy, jevons 1871."
17. See the preface (https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc2.ark:/13960/t4zg6mw37&view=1up&seq
=9) to Irving Fisher's 1897 work, A brief introduction to the infinitesimal calculus: designed
especially to aid in reading mathematical economics and statistics.
18. Sheila C., Dow (1999-05-21). "The Use of Mathematics in Economics" (http://www.ioe.ac.uk/esrc
maths/sheila1.html). ESRC Public Understanding of Mathematics Seminar. Birmingham:
Economic and Social Research Council. Retrieved 2008-07-06.
19. While the concept of cardinality has fallen out of favor in neoclassical economics, the differences
between cardinal utility and ordinal utility are minor for most applications.
20. Nicola, PierCarlo (2000). Mainstream Mathermatical Economics in the 20th Century (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=KR0Rbi8o4QQC). Springer. p. 4. ISBN 978-3-540-67084-1. Retrieved
2008-08-21.
21. Augustin Cournot (1838, tr. 1897) Researches into the Mathematical Principles of Wealth. Links to
description (https://books.google.com/books?id=AGoGpyJY_SAC) and chapters. (https://books.go
ogle.com/books?id=AGoGpyJY_SAC)
22. Hotelling, Harold (1990). "Stability in Competition" (https://books.google.com/books?id=dYbbHQA
ACAAJ). In Darnell, Adrian C. (ed.). The Collected Economics Articles of Harold Hotelling.
Springer. pp. 51, 52. ISBN 978-3-540-97011-8. OCLC 20217006 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/20
217006). Retrieved 2008-08-21.
23. "Antoine Augustin Cournot, 1801-1877" (https://web.archive.org/web/20000709103727/http://cep
a.newschool.edu/het/profiles/cournot.htm). The History of Economic Thought Website. The New
School for Social Research. Archived from the original (http://cepa.newschool.edu/het/profiles/cou
rnot.htm) on 2000-07-09. Retrieved 2008-08-21.
24. Gibbons, Robert (1992). Game Theory for Applied Economists (https://books.google.com/books?i
d=_6qgHgAACAAJ). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. pp. 14, 15. ISBN 978-0-
691-00395-5.
25. Nicola, p. 9-12
26. Edgeworth, Francis Ysidro (September 5, 1889). "The Mathematical Theory of Political Economy:
Review of Léon Walras, Éléments d'économie politique pure" (https://web.archive.org/web/200304
11130712/http://cepa.newschool.edu/het/texts/edgeworth/edgewalras89.pdf) (PDF). Nature. 40
(1036): 434–436. doi:10.1038/040434a0 (https://doi.org/10.1038%2F040434a0). ISSN 0028-0836
(https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0028-0836). S2CID 21004543 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/Cor
pusID:21004543). Archived from the original (http://cepa.newschool.edu/het/texts/edgeworth/edge
walras89.pdf) (PDF) on April 11, 2003. Retrieved 2008-08-21.
27. Nicholson, Walter; Snyder, Christopher, p. 350-353.
28. Dixon, Robert. "Walras Law and Macroeconomics" (https://web.archive.org/web/2008041710255
9/http://www.economics.unimelb.edu.au/rdixon/wlaw.html). Walras Law Guide. Department of
Economics, University of Melbourne. Archived from the original (http://www.economics.unimelb.ed
u.au/rdixon/wlaw.html) on April 17, 2008. Retrieved 2008-09-28.
29. Dixon, Robert. "A Formal Proof of Walras Law" (https://web.archive.org/web/20080430033548/htt
p://www.economics.unimelb.edu.au/rdixon/walproof.html). Walras Law Guide. Department of
Economics, University of Melbourne. Archived from the original (http://www.economics.unimelb.ed
u.au/rdixon/walproof.html) on April 30, 2008. Retrieved 2008-09-28.
30. Rima, Ingrid H. (1977). "Neoclassicism and Dissent 1890-1930" (https://books.google.com/books?
id=s7cJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PR5). In Weintraub, Sidney (ed.). Modern Economic Thought. University
of Pennsylvania Press. pp. 10, 11. ISBN 978-0-8122-7712-8.
31. Heilbroner, Robert L. (1999) [1953]. The Worldly Philosophers (https://books.google.com/books?i
d=N_3cj4urgJcC) (Seventh ed.). New York: Simon and Schuster. pp. 172–175, 313. ISBN 978-0-
684-86214-9.
32. Edgeworth, Francis Ysidro (1961) [1881]. Mathematical Psychics (https://books.google.com/book
s?id=Q4WCGAAACAAJ). London: Kegan Paul [A. M. Kelley]. pp. 15–19.
33. Nicola, p. 14, 15, 258-261
34. Bowley, Arthur Lyon (1960) [1924]. The Mathematical Groundwork of Economics: an Introductory
Treatise (https://books.google.com/books?id=_cgkAAAAMAAJ). Oxford: Clarendon Press [Kelly].
35. Gillies, D. B. (1969). "Solutions to general non-zero-sum games" (https://books.google.com/book
s?id=9lSVFzsTGWsC). In Tucker, A. W.; Luce, R. D. (eds.). Contributions to the Theory of
Games. Annals of Mathematics. Vol. 40. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
pp. 47–85. ISBN 978-0-691-07937-0.
36. Moss, Lawrence S. (2003). "The Seligman-Edgeworth Debate about the Analysis of Tax
Incidence: The Advent of Mathematical Economics, 1892–1910". History of Political Economy. 35
(2): 207, 212, 219, 234–237. doi:10.1215/00182702-35-2-205 (https://doi.org/10.1215%2F001827
02-35-2-205). ISSN 0018-2702 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0018-2702).
37. Hotelling, Harold (1990). "Note on Edgeworth's Taxation Phenomenon and Professor Garver's
Additional Condition on Demand Functions" (https://books.google.com/books?id=dYbbHQAACAA
J). In Darnell, Adrian C. (ed.). The Collected Economics Articles of Harold Hotelling. Springer.
pp. 94–122. ISBN 978-3-540-97011-8. OCLC 20217006 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/2021700
6). Retrieved 2008-08-26.
38. Herstein, I.N. (October 1953). "Some Mathematical Methods and Techniques in Economics" (http
s://doi.org/10.1090%2Fqam%2F60205). Quarterly of Applied Mathematics. 11 (3): 249–262.
doi:10.1090/qam/60205 (https://doi.org/10.1090%2Fqam%2F60205). ISSN 1552-4485 (https://ww
w.worldcat.org/issn/1552-4485). [Pp. 249-62 (https://web.archive.org/web/20000914192808/http://
cowles.econ.yale.edu/P/cp/p00b/p0078.pdf).

39. Weintraub, E. Roy (2008). "mathematics and economics", The New Palgrave Dictionary of
Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_
M000372&edition=current&q=&topicid=&result_number=1).
_____ (2002). How Economics Became a Mathematical Science. Duke University Press.
Description (https://web.archive.org/web/20100729022635/http://www.dukeupress.edu/Catalo
g/ViewProduct.php?productid=6807&viewby=series&categoryid=47&sort=newest) and
preview (https://books.google.com/books?id=ntc_Fs36AoQC&pg=PR7).
40. Nicholson, Walter; Snyder, Christopher (2007). "General Equilibrium and Welfare". Intermediate
Microeconomics and Its Applications (10th ed.). Thompson. pp. 364, 365. ISBN 978-0-324-31968-
2.
41. Jolink, Albert (2006). "What Went Wrong with Walras?". In Backhaus, Juergen G.; Maks, J.A.
Hans (eds.). From Walras to Pareto. The European Heritage in Economics and the Social
Sciences. Vol. IV. Springer. pp. 69–80. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-33757-9_6 (https://doi.org/10.1
007%2F978-0-387-33757-9_6). ISBN 978-0-387-33756-2.
Blaug, Mark (2007). "The Fundamental Theorems of Modern Welfare Economics, Historically
Contemplated" (https://semanticscholar.org/paper/8de537e37c8a44c7b86a6ca3f62652f074e1
ac02). History of Political Economy. 39 (2): 186–188. doi:10.1215/00182702-2007-001 (https://
doi.org/10.1215%2F00182702-2007-001). ISSN 0018-2702 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/001
8-2702). S2CID 154074343 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:154074343).
42. Blaug (2007), p. 185, 187
43. Metzler, Lloyd (1948). "Review of Foundations of Economic Analysis". American Economic
Review. 38 (5): 905–910. ISSN 0002-8282 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0002-8282).
JSTOR 1811704 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/1811704).
44. Neumann, J. von (1937). "Über ein ökonomisches Gleichungssystem und ein Verallgemeinerung
des Brouwerschen Fixpunktsatzes", Ergebnisse eines Mathematischen Kolloquiums, 8, pp. 73–
83, translated and published in 1945-46, as "A Model of General Equilibrium", Review of
Economic Studies, 13, pp. 1–9.
45. For this problem to have a unique solution, it suffices that the nonnegative matrices A and B
satisfy an irreducibility condition, generalizing that of the Perron–Frobenius theorem of
nonnegative matrices, which considers the (simplified) eigenvalue problem

A − λ I q = 0,

where the nonnegative matrix A must be square and where the diagonal matrix I is the identity
matrix. Von Neumann's irreducibility condition was called the "whales and wranglers" hypothesis
by David Champernowne, who provided a verbal and economic commentary on the English
translation of von Neumann's article. Von Neumann's hypothesis implied that every economic
process used a positive amount of every economic good. Weaker "irreducibility" conditions were
given by David Gale and by John Kemeny, Oskar Morgenstern, and Gerald L. Thompson in the
1950s and then by Stephen M. Robinson in the 1970s.
46. David Gale. The theory of linear economic models. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1960.
47. Morgenstern, Oskar; Thompson, Gerald L. (1976). Mathematical theory of expanding and
contracting economies. Lexington Books. Lexington, Massachusetts: D. C. Heath and Company.
pp. xviii+277.
48. Alexander Schrijver, Theory of Linear and Integer Programming. John Wiley & sons, 1998,
ISBN 0-471-98232-6.

49. Rockafellar, R. Tyrrell (1967). Monotone processes of convex and concave type. Memoirs of
the American Mathematical Society. Providence, R.I.: American Mathematical Society.
pp. i+74.
Rockafellar, R. T. (1974). "Convex algebra and duality in dynamic models of production". In
Josef Loz; Maria Loz (eds.). Mathematical models in economics (Proc. Sympos. and Conf. von
Neumann Models, Warsaw, 1972). Amsterdam: North-Holland and Polish Academy of
Sciences (PAN). pp. 351–378.
Rockafellar, R. T. (1997) [1970]. Convex analysis. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University
Press.
50. Kenneth Arrow, Paul Samuelson, John Harsanyi, Sidney Afriat, Gerald L. Thompson, and
Nicholas Kaldor. (1989). Mohammed Dore; Sukhamoy Chakravarty; Richard Goodwin (eds.).
John Von Neumann and modern economics. Oxford:Clarendon. p. 261.
51. Chapter 9.1 "The von Neumann growth model" (pages 277–299): Yinyu Ye. Interior point
algorithms: Theory and analysis. Wiley. 1997.
52. Screpanti, Ernesto; Zamagni, Stefano (1993). An Outline of the History of Economic Thought.
New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 288–290. ISBN 978-0-19-828370-6. OCLC 57281275 (htt
ps://www.worldcat.org/oclc/57281275).
53. David Gale. The theory of linear economic models. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1960.
54. Morgenstern, Oskar; Thompson, Gerald L. (1976). Mathematical theory of expanding and
contracting economies. Lexington Books. Lexington, Massachusetts: D. C. Heath and Company.
pp. xviii+277.
55. "The Nature of Mathematical Programming (https://web.archive.org/web/20060624034203/http://gl
ossary.computing.society.informs.org/index.php?page=nature.html)", Mathematical Programming
Glossary, INFORMS Computing Society.
56. Schmedders, Karl (2008). "numerical optimization methods in economics", The New Palgrave
Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition, v. 6, pp. 138–57. Abstract. (http://www.dictionaryofeconomic
s.com/article?id=pde2008_N000148&edition=current&q=optimization&topicid=&result_number=1)
57. Robbins, Lionel (1935, 2nd ed.). An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science,
Macmillan, p. 16.
58. Blume, Lawrence E. (2008). "duality", The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition.
Abstract. (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_D000196)
59. Dixit, A. K. ([1976] 1990). Optimization in Economic Theory, 2nd ed., Oxford. Description (https://b
ooks.google.com/books?id=dHrsHz0VocUC&pg=PA194=false) and contents preview (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=dHrsHz0VocUC&dq=false&pg=PR7).

60. Samuelson, Paul A., 1998. "How Foundations Came to Be", Journal of Economic Literature,
36(3), pp. 1375 (https://www.jstor.org/pss/2564803)–1386.
_____ (1970)."Maximum Principles in Analytical Economics" (https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel
_prizes/economics/laureates/1970/samuelson-lecture.pdf), Nobel Prize lecture.

61. Allan M. Feldman (3008). "welfare economics", The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics,
2nd Edition. Abstract (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_W000050&e
dition=current&q=fundamental%20theorems%20&topicid=&result_number=3).
Mas-Colell, Andreu, Michael D. Whinston, and Jerry R. Green (1995), Microeconomic Theory,
Chapter 16. Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-510268-1. Description (http://www.oup.com/u
s/catalog/general/subject/Economics/MicroeconomicTheory/?view=usa&ci=9780195073409)
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20120126115547/http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/gener
al/subject/Economics/MicroeconomicTheory/?view=usa) 2012-01-26 at the Wayback Machine
and contents (http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/Economics/MicroeconomicTheor
y/?view=usa&sf=toc&ci=9780195073409) .

62. Geanakoplos, John ([1987] 2008). "Arrow–Debreu model of general equilibrium", The New
Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.co
m/article?id=pde2008_A000133&edition=current&q=optimization&topicid=&result_number=2
0).
Arrow, Kenneth J., and Gérard Debreu (1954). "Existence of an Equilibrium for a Competitive
Economy", Econometrica 22(3), pp. 265 (https://www.jstor.org/pss/1907353)-290.
63. Scarf, Herbert E. (2008). "computation of general equilibria", The New Palgrave Dictionary of
Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract. (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_
C000573&q=computational%20economics&topicid=&result_number=3)

 
Kubler, Felix (2008). "computation of general equilibria (new developments)", The New
Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract. (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.co
m/article?id=pde2008_C000564&q=computational%20economics&topicid=&result_number=2)
64. Nicola, p. 133
65. Dorfman, Robert, Paul A. Samuelson, and Robert M. Solow (1958). Linear Programming and
Economic Analysis. McGraw–Hill. Chapter-preview links. (https://books.google.com/books?id=k5_
vzaCNQP4C&pg=PP11)
66. M. Padberg, Linear Optimization and Extensions, Second Edition, Springer-Verlag, 1999.
67. Dantzig, George B. ([1987] 2008). "linear programming", The New Palgrave Dictionary of
Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_L00
0106&edition=current&q=Linear%20programming&topicid=&result_number=1).

68. Intriligator, Michael D. (2008). "nonlinear programming", The New Palgrave Dictionary of
Economics, 2nd Edition. TOC (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_N00
0083&edition=current&q=non-linear%20programming&topicid=&result_number=3).
Blume, Lawrence E. (2008). "convex programming", The New Palgrave Dictionary of
Economics, 2nd Edition.
Abstract (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_C000348&edition=current&q
=optimization&topicid=&result_number=4).
Kuhn, H. W.; Tucker, A. W. (1951). "Nonlinear programming". Proceedings of 2nd Berkeley
Symposium. Berkeley: University of California Press. pp. 481–492.

69. Bertsekas, Dimitri P. (1999). Nonlinear Programming (Second ed.). Cambridge,

Massachusetts.: Athena Scientific. ISBN 978-1-886529-00-7.
Vapnyarskii, I.B. (2001) [1994], "Lagrange multipliers" (https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/in
dex.php?title=Lagrange_multipliers), Encyclopedia of Mathematics, EMS Press.
Lasdon, Leon S. (1970). Optimization theory for large systems. Macmillan series in operations
research. New York: The Macmillan Company. pp. xi+523. MR 0337317 (https://mathscinet.am
s.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=0337317).
Lasdon, Leon S. (2002). Optimization theory for large systems (reprint of the 1970
Macmillan ed.). Mineola, New York: Dover Publications, Inc. pp. xiii+523. MR 1888251 (https://
mathscinet.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=1888251).
Hiriart-Urruty, Jean-Baptiste; Lemaréchal, Claude (1993). "XII Abstract duality for
practitioners". Convex analysis and minimization algorithms, Volume II: Advanced theory and
bundle methods. Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles
of Mathematical Sciences]. Vol. 306. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. pp. 136–193 (and Bibliographical
comments on pp. 334–335). ISBN 978-3-540-56852-0. MR 1295240 (https://mathscinet.ams.o
rg/mathscinet-getitem?mr=1295240).
70. Lemaréchal, Claude (2001). "Lagrangian relaxation". In Michael Jünger; Denis Naddef (eds.).
Computational combinatorial optimization: Papers from the Spring School held in Schloß
Dagstuhl, May 15–19, 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 2241. Berlin: Springer-
Verlag. pp. 112–156. doi:10.1007/3-540-45586-8_4 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2F3-540-45586-8_
4). ISBN 978-3-540-42877-0. MR 1900016 (https://mathscinet.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=19
00016). S2CID 9048698 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:9048698).
71. Pontryagin, L. S.; Boltyanski, V. G., Gamkrelidze, R. V., Mischenko, E. F. (1962). The
Mathematical Theory of Optimal Processes (https://books.google.com/books?id=kwzq0F4cBVA
C). New York: Wiley. ISBN 9782881240775.

72. Zelikin, M. I. ([1987] 2008). "Pontryagin's principle of optimality", The New Palgrave Dictionary
of Economics, 2nd Edition. Preview link (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/search_result
s?q=%22Pontryagin%27s+principle+of+optimality%22&edition=current&button_search=GO).
Martos, Béla (1987). "control and coordination of economic activity", The New Palgrave: A
Dictionary of Economics. Description link (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/search_resul
ts?q=control+coordination+Martos+&field=content&edition=all&topicid=).
Brock, W. A. (1987). "optimal control and economic dynamics", The New Palgrave: A
Dictionary of Economics. Outline (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde1987_
X001613).
Shell, K., ed. (1967). Essays on the Theory of Optimal Economic Growth (https://archive.org/d
etails/essaysontheoryof00karl). Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-
19036-7.]
73. Stokey, Nancy L. and Robert E. Lucas with Edward Prescott (1989). Recursive Methods in
Economic Dynamics, Harvard University Press, chapter 5. Desecription (http://www.hup.harvard.e
du/catalog.php?isbn=9780674750968) and chapter-preview links (https://books.google.com/book
s?id=tWYo0QolyLAC&q=f%3Dfalse&pg=PR11).
74. Malliaris, A.G. (2008). "stochastic optimal control", The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics,
2nd Edition. Abstract (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_S000269&editio
n=&field=keyword&q=Taylor's%20th&topicid=&result_number=1) Archived (https://web.archive.or
g/web/20171018182459/http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_S000269&edi
tion=&field=keyword&q=Taylor%27s%20th&topicid=&result_number=1) 2017-10-18 at the
Wayback Machine.

75. Arrow, K. J.; Kurz, M. (1970). Public Investment, the Rate of Return, and Optimal Fiscal Policy
(https://archive.org/details/publicinvestment0000arro). Baltimore, Maryland: The Johns
Hopkins Press. ISBN 978-0-8018-1124-1. Abstract. (http://md1.csa.com/partners/viewrecord.p
hp?requester=gs&collection=ENV&recid=7107596&q=&uid=788819967&setcookie=yes)
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20130309003925/http://md1.csa.com/partners/viewreco
rd.php?requester=gs&collection=ENV&recid=7107596&q=&uid=788819967&setcookie=yes)
2013-03-09 at the Wayback Machine
Sethi, S. P.; Thompson, G. L. (2000). Optimal Control Theory: Applications to Management
Science and Economics, Second Edition. New York: Springer. ISBN 978-0-7923-8608-7.
Scroll to chapter-preview links. (https://books.google.com/books?id=gLMmaLYRy4QC)
76. Andrew McLennan, 2008. "fixed point theorems", The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd
Edition. Abstract (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_F000135&edition=cu
rrent&q=).
77. Weintraub, E. Roy (1977). "General Equilibrium Theory" (https://books.google.com/books?id=JDq
AAAAAIAAJ). In Weintraub, Sidney (ed.). Modern Economic Thought. University of Pennsylvania
Press. pp. 107–109. ISBN 978-0-8122-7712-8.
Arrow, Kenneth J.; Debreu, Gérard (1954). "Existence of an equilibrium for a competitive
economy". Econometrica. 22 (3): 265–290. doi:10.2307/1907353 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F
1907353). ISSN 0012-9682 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0012-9682). JSTOR 1907353 (http
s://www.jstor.org/stable/1907353).
78. Kantorovich, Leonid, and Victor Polterovich (2008). "Functional analysis", in S. Durlauf and L.
Blume, ed., The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract. (http://www.diction
aryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_F000236), ed., Palgrave Macmillan.
79. Kantorovich, L. V (1990). " "My journey in science (supposed report to the Moscow Mathematical
Society)" [expanding Russian Math. Surveys 42 (1987), no. 2, pp. 233–270]". In Lev J. Leifman
(ed.). Functional analysis, optimization, and mathematical economics: A collection of papers
dedicated to the memory of Leonid Vitalʹevich Kantorovich. New York: The Clarendon Press,
Oxford University Press. pp. 8–45. ISBN 978-0-19-505729-4. MR 0898626 (https://mathscinet.am
s.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=0898626).
80. Page 406: Polyak, B. T. (2002). "History of mathematical programming in the USSR: Analyzing the
phenomenon (Chapter 3 The pioneer: L. V. Kantorovich, 1912–1986, pp. 405–407)". Mathematical
Programming. Series B. 91 (ISMP 2000, Part 1 (Atlanta, GA), number 3): 401–416.
doi:10.1007/s101070100258 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs101070100258). MR 1888984 (https://
mathscinet.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=1888984). S2CID 13089965 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:13089965).
81. "Leonid Vitaliyevich Kantorovich — Prize Lecture ("Mathematics in economics: Achievements,
difficulties, perspectives")" (http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/1975/kantorovi
ch-lecture.html). Nobelprize.org. Retrieved 12 Dec 2010.
82. Aliprantis, Charalambos D.; Brown, Donald J.; Burkinshaw, Owen (1990). Existence and
optimality of competitive equilibria. Berlin: Springer–Verlag. pp. xii+284. ISBN 978-3-540-52866-1.
MR 1075992 (https://mathscinet.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=1075992).
83. Rockafellar, R. Tyrrell. Conjugate duality and optimization. Lectures given at the Johns Hopkins
University, Baltimore, Maryland, June, 1973. Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences
Regional Conference Series in Applied Mathematics, No. 16. Society for Industrial and Applied
Mathematics, Philadelphia, Pa., 1974. vi+74 pp.
84. Lester G. Telser and Robert L. Graves Functional Analysis in Mathematical Economics:
Optimization Over Infinite Horizons 1972. University of Chicago Press, 1972, ISBN 978-0-226-
79190-6.
85. Neumann, John von, and Oskar Morgenstern (1944) Theory of Games and Economic Behavior,
Princeton.
86. Mas-Colell, Andreu (1985). The Theory of general economic equilibrium: A differentiable
approach. Econometric Society monographs. Cambridge UP. ISBN 978-0-521-26514-0.
MR 1113262 (https://mathscinet.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=1113262).
87. Yves Balasko. Foundations of the Theory of General Equilibrium, 1988, ISBN 0-12-076975-1.
88. Creedy, John (2008). "Francis Ysidro (1845–1926)", The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics,
2nd Edition. Abstract (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_E000041&editio
n=current&q=edgeworth&topicid=&result_number=3).
89. Nash, John F., Jr. (1950). "The Bargaining Problem", Econometrica, 18(2), pp. 155-162 (http://
www.stern.nyu.edu/networks/Nash_The_Bargaining_Problem.pdf).
Serrano, Roberto (2008). "bargaining", The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd
Edition. Abstract (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_B000073&edition
=current&q=bargaining&topicid=&result_number=1).
90. * Smith, Vernon L. (1992). "Game Theory and Experimental Economics: Beginnings and Early
Influences", in E. R. Weintraub, ed., Towards a History of Game Theory, pp. 241- (https://books.g
oogle.com/books?id=9CHY2Gozh1MC&pg=PA241) 282.
_____ (2001). "Experimental Economics", International Encyclopedia of the Social &
Behavioral Sciences, pp. 5100–5108. Abstract (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pi
i/B0080430767022324) per sect. 1.1 & 2.1.
Plott, Charles R., and Vernon L. Smith, ed. (2008). Handbook of Experimental Economics
Results, v. 1, Elsevier, Part 4, Games, ch. 45-66 preview links (https://archive.today/20120910
050854/http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_hubEid=1-s2.0-S15740
72207X00015&_cid=277334&_pubType=HS&_auth=y&_acct=C000228598&_version=1&_url
Version=0&_userid=10&md5=49f8b6d5e3024eac39ed5fad351fe568).
Shubik, Martin (2002). "Game Theory and Experimental Gaming", in R. Aumann and S. Hart,
ed., Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, Elsevier, v. 3, pp. 2327–2351.
Abstract (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1574000502030254).
91. From The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics (2008), 2nd Edition:
Gul, Faruk. "behavioural economics and game theory." Abstract. (http://www.dictionaryofecono
mics.com/article?id=pde2008_G000210&q=Behavioral%20economics%20&topicid=&result_n
umber=2)
Camerer, Colin F. "behavioral game theory." Abstract. (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/
article?id=pde2008_B000302&q=Behavioral%20economics%20&topicid=&result_number=13)

92. Rasmusen, Eric (2007). Games and Information, 4th ed. Description (http://www.wiley.com/Wil
eyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-EHEP001009.html) and chapter-preview links. (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=5XEMuJwnBmUC&dq=gbs_atb&pg=PR5)
Aumann, R., and S. Hart, ed. (1992, 2002). Handbook of Game Theory with Economic
Applications v. 1, links at ch. 3-6 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/handbooks/15740005/
1) and v. 3, ch. 43 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1574000502030060).

93. Tirole, Jean (1988). The Theory of Industrial Organization, MIT Press. Description (https://web.
archive.org/web/20011122194726/http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?tid=8224&tt
ype=2) and chapter-preview links, pp. vii-ix (https://archive.org/details/theoryofindustri00jean),
"General Organization", pp. 5-6 (https://archive.org/details/theoryofindustri00jean/page/5), and
"Non-Cooperative Game Theory: A User's Guide Manual,' " ch. 11, pp. 423-59 (https://archive.
org/details/theoryofindustri00jean/page/423).
Bagwell, Kyle, and Asher Wolinsky (2002). "Game theory and Industrial Organization", ch. 49,
Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,
v. 3, pp. 1851 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1574000502030126)-1895.
94. Shubik, Martin (1981). "Game Theory Models and Methods in Political Economy", in
Handbook of Mathematical Economics,, v. 1, pp. 285 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_
ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B7P5Y-4FDF0FN-C&_user=10&_coverDate=01/01/1981&_rdoc=11&_fm
t=high&_orig=browse&_origin=browse&_zone=rslt_list_item&_srch=doc-info(%23toc%232461
5%231981%23999989999%23565707%23FLP%23display%23Volume)&_cdi=24615&_sort=d
&_docanchor=&_ct=14&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=c
b34198ec88c9ab8fa59af6d5634e9cf&searchtype=a)-330.

95. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics (2008), 2nd Edition:

     Myerson, Roger B. "mechanism design." Abstract. (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/
article?id=pde2008_M000132&edition=current&q=mechanism%20design&topicid=&result_nu
mber=3)
     _____. "revelation principle." Abstract. (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pd
e2008_R000137&edition=current&q=moral&topicid=&result_number=1)
     Sandholm, Tuomas. "computing in mechanism design." Abstract. (http://www.dictionaryofec
onomics.com/article?id=pde2008_C000563&edition=&field=keyword&q=algorithmic%20mech
anism%20design&topicid=&result_number=1)
Nisan, Noam, and Amir Ronen (2001). "Algorithmic Mechanism Design", Games and
Economic Behavior, 35(1-2), pp. 166–196 (https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~sandholm/cs15-892F09/
Algorithmic%20mechanism%20design.pdf).
Nisan, Noam, et al., ed. (2007). Algorithmic Game Theory, Cambridge University Press.
Description (http://www.cup.cam.ac.uk/asia/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521872829)
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20120505140924/http://www.cup.cam.ac.uk/asia/catalo
gue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521872829) 2012-05-05 at the Wayback Machine.

96. Halpern, Joseph Y. (2008). "computer science and game theory", The New Palgrave
Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?i
d=pde2008_C000566&edition=current&q=&topicid=&result_number=1).
        
Shoham, Yoav (2008). "Computer Science and Game Theory", Communications of the ACM,
51(8), pp.
75-79 (http://www.robotics.stanford.edu/~shoham/www%20papers/CSGT-CACM-Shoham.pdf)
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20120426005917/http://www.robotics.stanford.edu/~shoha
m/www%20papers/CSGT-CACM-Shoham.pdf) 2012-04-26 at the Wayback Machine.
        
Roth, Alvin E. (2002). "The Economist as Engineer: Game Theory, Experimentation, and
Computation as Tools for Design Economics", Econometrica, 70(4), pp. 1341–1378 (https://we
b.archive.org/web/20040414102216/http://kuznets.fas.harvard.edu/~aroth/papers/engineer.pd
f).

97. Kirman, Alan (2008). "economy as a complex system", The New Palgrave Dictionary of
Economics , 2nd Edition. Abstract (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_
E000246&edition=current&q=Computational%20economics&topicid=&result_number=20).
Tesfatsion, Leigh (2003). "Agent-based Computational Economics: Modeling Economies as
Complex Adaptive Systems", Information Sciences, 149(4), pp. 262-268 (https://web.archive.o
rg/web/20120426000037/http://copper.math.buffalo.edu/urgewiki/uploads/Literature/Tesfatsion
2002.pdf).
 98. Scott E. Page (2008), "agent-based models", The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd
Edition. Abstract (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_A000218&edition=cu
rrent&q=agent-based%20computational%20modeling&topicid=&result_number=1).

99. Holland, John H., and John H. Miller (1991). "Artificial Adaptive Agents in Economic Theory",
American Economic Review, 81(2), pp. 365-370 (http://www.santafe.edu/media/workingpaper
s/91-05-025.pdf) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20110105015853/http://www.santafe.e
du/media/workingpapers/91-05-025.pdf) 2011-01-05 at the Wayback Machine p. 366.
Arthur, W. Brian, 1994. "Inductive Reasoning and Bounded Rationality", American Economic
Review, 84(2), pp. 406-411 (https://web.archive.org/web/20130521145936/http://www-persona
l.umich.edu/~samoore/bit885f2011/arthur-inductive.pdf).
Schelling, Thomas C. (1978 [2006]). Micromotives and Macrobehavior, Norton. Description (ht
tp://books.wwnorton.com/books/978-0-393-32946-9/) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20
171102093240/http://books.wwnorton.com/books/978-0-393-32946-9/) 2017-11-02 at the
Wayback Machine, preview (https://books.google.com/books?id=DenWKRgqzWMC&pg=PA1
=).
Sargent, Thomas J. (1994). Bounded Rationality in Macroeconomics, Oxford. Description (htt
p://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/Economics/MacroeconomicTheory/?view=usa&ci
=9780198288695) and chapter-preview 1st-page links (https://www.questia.com/library/book/b
ounded-rationality-in-macroeconomics-thomas-j-sargent-by-thomas-j-sargent.jsp).

100. Judd, Kenneth L. (2006). "Computationally Intensive Analyses in Economics", Handbook of

Computational Economics, v. 2, ch. 17, Introduction, p. 883. Pp. 881- (https://books.google.co
m/books?id=6ITfRkNmKQcC&pg=PA881) 893. Pre-pub PDF (https://www2.econ.iastate.edu/t
esfatsi/Judd.finalrev.pdf).
  • _____ (1998). Numerical Methods in Economics, MIT Press. Links to description (https://we
b.archive.org/web/20020923144108/http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&t
id=3257) and chapter previews (https://books.google.com/books?id=9Wxk_z9HskAC&pg=PR
7).

101. Tesfatsion, Leigh (2002). "Agent-Based Computational Economics: Growing Economies from
the Bottom Up", Artificial Life, 8(1), pp.55-82. Abstract (http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/ab
s/10.1162/106454602753694765) and pre-pub PDF (https://web.archive.org/web/2013051414
3904/http://www.econ.brown.edu/fac/Peter_Howitt/SummerSchool/Agent.pdf).
  • _____ (1997). "How Economists Can Get Alife", in W. B. Arthur, S. Durlauf, and D. Lane,
eds., The Economy as an Evolving Complex System, II, pp. 533–564. Addison-Wesley. Pre-
pub PDF (http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/18196/1/er37.pdf).
102. Tesfatsion, Leigh (2006), "Agent-Based Computational Economics: A Constructive Approach to
Economic Theory", ch. 16, Handbook of Computational Economics, v. 2, part 2, ACE study of
economic system. Abstract (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S157400210502016
2) and pre-pub PDF (http://econ2.econ.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/hbintlt.pdf).
103. Axelrod, Robert (1997). The Complexity of Cooperation: Agent-Based Models of Competition and
Collaboration, Princeton. Description (http://press.princeton.edu/titles/6144.html), contents (http://
press.princeton.edu/titles/6144.html#TOC), and preview (https://books.google.com/books?id=J0d
gRGMdjmQC&pg=PR11).
104. Leombruni, Roberto, and Matteo Richiardi, ed. (2004), Industry and Labor Dynamics: The
Agent-Based Computational Economics Approach. World Scientific Publishing ISBN 981-256-
100-5. Description (http://www.worldscibooks.com/economics/5706.html) Archived (https://we
b.archive.org/web/20100727221149/http://www.worldscibooks.com/economics/5706.html)
2010-07-27 at the Wayback Machine and chapter-preview links (https://books.google.com/boo
ks?id=P5O7A5D55nQC&pg=PR5).
Epstein, Joshua M. (2006). "Growing Adaptive Organizations: An Agent-Based Computational
Approach", in Generative Social Science: Studies in Agent-Based Computational Modeling,
pp. 309 - [1] (https://books.google.com/books?id=543OS3qdxBYC&dq=false&pg=PA326) 344.
Description (http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8277.html) and abstract (http://www.santafe.edu/r
esearch/working-papers/abstract/99895b6465e8b87656612f8e3570b34c/).
105. Klosa, Tomas B., and Bart Nooteboom, 2001. "Agent-based Computational Transaction Cost
Economics", Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 25(3–4), pp. 503–52. Abstract. (http://ww
w.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165188900000348)
106. Axtell, Robert (2005). "The Complexity of Exchange", Economic Journal, 115(504, Features), pp.
F193-F210 (http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/pboettke/workshop/archives/f05/Axtell.pdf).
107. Sandholm, Tuomas W., and Victor R. Lesser (2001)."Leveled Commitment Contracts and
Strategic Breach", Games and Economic Behavior, 35(1-2), pp. 212-270 (https://www.cs.cmu.ed
u/afs/.cs.cmu.edu/Web/People/sandholm/leveled.geb.pdf).

108. Colander, David, Peter Howitt, Alan Kirman, Axel Leijonhufvud, and Perry Mehrling (2008).
"Beyond DSGE Models: Toward an Empirically Based Macroeconomics", American Economic
Review, 98(2), pp. 236 (https://www.jstor.org/pss/29730026)-240. Pre-pub PDF (https://web.ar
chive.org/web/20100622214223/http://www.econ.brown.edu/fac/Peter_Howitt/publication/com
plex%20macro6.pdf).
Sargent, Thomas J. (1994). Bounded Rationality in Macroeconomics, Oxford. Description (htt
p://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/Economics/MacroeconomicTheory/?view=usa&ci
=9780198288695) and chapter-preview 1st-page links (https://www.questia.com/library/book/b
ounded-rationality-in-macroeconomics-thomas-j-sargent-by-thomas-j-sargent.jsp).
109. Tesfatsion, Leigh (2006), "Agent-Based Computational Economics: A Constructive Approach to
Economic Theory", ch. 16, Handbook of Computational Economics, v. 2, pp. 832–865. Abstract (ht
tp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1574002105020162) and pre-pub PDF (http://econ
2.econ.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/hbintlt.pdf).
110. Smith, Vernon L. (2008). "experimental economics", The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics,
2nd Edition. Abstract (http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_E000277&q=ex
perimental%20&topicid=&result_number=2).
111. Duffy, John (2006). "Agent-Based Models and Human Subject Experiments", ch. 19, Handbook of
Computational Economics, v.2, pp. 949–101. Abstract (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/articl
e/pii/S1574002105020198).

112. Namatame, Akira, and Takao Terano (2002). "The Hare and the Tortoise: Cumulative Progress
in Agent-based Simulation", in Agent-based Approaches in Economic and Social Complex
Systems. pp. 3- (https://books.google.com/books?id=nTkwxVUYvfIC&pg=PA3=onepage) 14,
IOS Press. Description (http://www.iospress.nl/book/agent-based-approaches-in-economic-an
d-social-complex-systems-2/).
Fagiolo, Giorgio, Alessio Moneta, and Paul Windrum (2007). "A Critical Guide to Empirical
Validation of Agent-Based Models in Economics: Methodologies, Procedures, and Open
Problems", Computational Economics, 30, pp. 195 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs10614-007-91
04-4)–226.
113. Tesfatsion, Leigh (2006). "Agent-Based Computational Economics: A Constructive Approach
to Economic Theory", ch. 16, Handbook of Computational Economics, v. 2, [pp. 831–880] sect.
5. Abstract (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1574002105020162) and pre-
pub PDF (http://econ2.econ.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/hbintlt.pdf).
Judd, Kenneth L. (2006). "Computationally Intensive Analyses in Economics", Handbook of
Computational Economics, v. 2, ch. 17, pp. 881- (https://books.google.com/books?id=6ITfRkN
mKQcC&pg=PA881) 893. Pre-pub PDF (https://www2.econ.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/Judd.finalrev.p
df).
Tesfatsion, Leigh, and Kenneth L. Judd, ed. (2006). Handbook of Computational Economics, v.
2. Description (http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/bookdescription.cws_home/660847/descriptio
n#description) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20120306100156/http://www.elsevier.co
m/wps/find/bookdescription.cws_home/660847/description#description) 2012-03-06 at the
Wayback Machine & and chapter-preview
links. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_hubEid=1-s2.0-S157400210
5X02003&_cid=273377&_pubType=HS&_auth=y&_acct=C000228598&_version=1&_urlVersion=
0&_userid=10&md5=e4757b4f65755ed6340a11fee9615200)
114. Brockhaus, Oliver; Farkas, Michael; Ferraris, Andrew; Long, Douglas; Overhaus, Marcus (2000).
Equity Derivatives and Market Risk Models (https://books.google.com/books?id=JGZPAAAAMAA
J). Risk Books. pp. 13–17. ISBN 978-1-899332-87-8. Retrieved 2008-08-17.
115. Liner, Gaines H. (2002). "Core Journals in Economics". Economic Inquiry. 40 (1): 140.
doi:10.1093/ei/40.1.138 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fei%2F40.1.138).
116. Stigler, George J.; Stigler, Steven J.; Friedland, Claire (April 1995). "The Journals of Economics"
(https://semanticscholar.org/paper/7f89b50a05c3caa25034510f2053d523a9327dfc). The Journal
of Political Economy. 103 (2): 331–359. doi:10.1086/261986 (https://doi.org/10.1086%2F261986).
ISSN 0022-3808 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0022-3808). JSTOR 2138643 (https://www.jstor.or
g/stable/2138643). S2CID 154780520 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:154780520).
117. Stigler et al. reviewed journal articles in core economic journals (as defined by the authors but
meaning generally non-specialist journals) throughout the 20th century. Journal articles which at
any point used geometric representation or mathematical notation were noted as using that level
of mathematics as its "highest level of mathematical technique". The authors refer to "verbal
techniques" as those which conveyed the subject of the piece without notation from geometry,
algebra or calculus.
118. Stigler et al., p. 342
119. Sutter, Daniel and Rex Pjesky. "Where Would Adam Smith Publish Today?: The Near Absence of
Math-free Research in Top Journals" (May 2007). [2] (http://econjwatch.org/issues/volume-4-numb
er-1-may-2007)
120. Arrow, Kenneth J. (April 1960). "The Work of Ragnar Frisch, Econometrician". Econometrica. 28
(2): 175–192. doi:10.2307/1907716 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F1907716). ISSN 0012-9682 (http
s://www.worldcat.org/issn/0012-9682). JSTOR 1907716 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/1907716).
121. Bjerkholt, Olav (July 1995). "Ragnar Frisch, Editor of Econometrica 1933-1954". Econometrica. 63
(4): 755–765. doi:10.2307/2171799 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F2171799). ISSN 0012-9682 (http
s://www.worldcat.org/issn/0012-9682). JSTOR 1906940 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/1906940).
122. Lange, Oskar (1945). "The Scope and Method of Economics". Review of Economic Studies. 13
(1): 19–32. doi:10.2307/2296113 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F2296113). ISSN 0034-6527 (https://
www.worldcat.org/issn/0034-6527). JSTOR 2296113 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/2296113).
S2CID 4140287 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:4140287).
123. Aldrich, John (January 1989). "Autonomy". Oxford Economic Papers. 41 (1, History and
Methodology of Econometrics): 15–34. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a041889 (https://doi.org/1
0.1093%2Foxfordjournals.oep.a041889). ISSN 0030-7653 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0030-76
53). JSTOR 2663180 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/2663180).
124. Epstein, Roy J. (1987). A History of Econometrics. Contributions to Economic Analysis. North-
Holland. pp. 13–19. ISBN 978-0-444-70267-8. OCLC 230844893 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/2
30844893).
125. Colander, David C. (2004). "The Strange Persistence of the IS-LM Model". History of Political
Economy. 36 (Annual Supplement): 305–322. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.692.6446 (https://citeseerx.ist.ps
u.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.692.6446). doi:10.1215/00182702-36-Suppl_1-305 (https://d
oi.org/10.1215%2F00182702-36-Suppl_1-305). ISSN 0018-2702 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0
018-2702). S2CID 6705939 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:6705939).
126. Brems, Hans (October 1975). "Marshall on Mathematics". Journal of Law and Economics. 18 (2):
583–585. doi:10.1086/466825 (https://doi.org/10.1086%2F466825). ISSN 0022-2186 (https://ww
w.worldcat.org/issn/0022-2186). JSTOR 725308 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/725308).
S2CID 154881432 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:154881432).
127. Frigg, R.; Hartman, S. (February 27, 2006). Edward N. Zalta (ed.). Models in Science (http://plato.
stanford.edu/entries/models-science/#OntWhaMod). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Stanford, California: The Metaphysics Research Lab. ISSN 1095-5054 (https://www.worldcat.org/i
ssn/1095-5054). Retrieved 2008-08-16.
128. "Greg Mankiw's Blog: An Exercise for My Readers" (http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2017/10/an-e
xercise-for-my-readers.html). Retrieved 2019-08-07.
129. Cochrane, John H. (2017-10-21). "The Grumpy Economist: Greg's algebra" (https://johnhcochran
e.blogspot.com/2017/10/gregs-algebra.html). The Grumpy Economist. Retrieved 2019-08-07.
130. Ekelund, Robert; Hébert, Robert (2014). A History of Economic Theory & Method (6th ed.). Long
Grove, IL: Waveland Press. pp. 574–575.
131. Hayek, Friedrich (September 1945). "The Use of Knowledge in Society". American Economic
Review. 35 (4): 519–530. JSTOR 1809376 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/1809376).
132. Heilbroner, Robert (May–June 1999). "The end of the Dismal Science?" (https://web.archive.org/w
eb/20081210091203/http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1093/is_3_42/ai_54682627/print).
Challenge Magazine. Archived from the original (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1093/is_3_
42/ai_54682627/print) on 2008-12-10.
133. Beed & Owen, 584
134. Boland, L. A. (2007). "Seven Decades of Economic Methodology" (https://books.google.com/book
s?id=w-BEoTj0axoC). In I. C. Jarvie; K. Milford; D.W. Miller (eds.). Karl Popper:A Centenary
Assessment. London: Ashgate Publishing. p. 219. ISBN 978-0-7546-5375-2. Retrieved
2008-06-10.
135. Beed, Clive; Kane, Owen (1991). "What Is the Critique of the Mathematization of Economics?".
Kyklos. 44 (4): 581–612. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6435.1991.tb01798.x (https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.14
67-6435.1991.tb01798.x).
136. Friedman, Milton (1953). Essays in Positive Economics (https://archive.org/details/essaysinpositiv
e00milt). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 30 (https://archive.org/details/essaysinpositive
00milt/page/30), 33, 41. ISBN 978-0-226-26403-5.
137. Keynes, John Maynard (1936). The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money (https://w
ww.marxists.org/reference/subject/economics/keynes/general-theory/ch21.htm). Cambridge:
Macmillan. p. 297. ISBN 978-0-333-10729-4.
138. Paul A. Samuelson (1952). "Economic Theory and Mathematics — An Appraisal", American
Economic Review, 42(2), pp. 56, 64-65 (https://web.archive.org/web/20000914192525/http://cowl
es.econ.yale.edu/P/cp/p00b/p0061.pdf) (press +).
139. D.W. Bushaw and R.W. Clower (1957). Introduction to Mathematical Economics, p. vii. (http://bab
el.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.b3513586;page=root;view=image;size=100;seq=11;num=vii)
140. Solow, Robert M. (20 March 1988). "The Wide, Wide World Of Wealth (The New Palgrave: A
Dictionary of Economics. Edited by John Eatwell, Murray Milgate and Peter Newman. Four
volumes. 4,103 pp. New York: Stockton Press. $650)" (https://www.nytimes.com/1988/03/20/book
s/the-wide-wide-world-of-wealth.html?scp=1). New York Times.

Further reading
Alpha C. Chiang and Kevin Wainwright, [1967] 2005. Fundamental Methods of Mathematical
Economics, McGraw-Hill Irwin. Contents. (http://www.mhprofessional.com/product.php?isbn=0070
109109)
E. Roy Weintraub, 1982. Mathematics for Economists, Cambridge. Contents (https://archive.org/d
etails/mathematicsforec0000wein).
Stephen Glaister, 1984. Mathematical Methods for Economists, 3rd ed., Blackwell. Contents. (http
s://books.google.com/books?id=Ct2nrJSHxsQC&pg=PR5=onepage)
Akira Takayama, 1985. Mathematical Economics, 2nd ed. Cambridge. Contents (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=685iPEaLAEcC&pg=PR9=onepage).
Nancy L. Stokey and Robert E. Lucas with Edward Prescott, 1989. Recursive Methods in
Economic Dynamics, Harvard University Press. Desecription (http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.
php?isbn=9780674750968) and chapter-preview links (https://books.google.com/books?id=tWYo0
QolyLAC&q=f%3Dfalse&pg=PR11).
A. K. Dixit, [1976] 1990. Optimization in Economic Theory, 2nd ed., Oxford. Description (https://bo
oks.google.com/books?id=dHrsHz0VocUC&pg=PA194=false) and contents preview (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=dHrsHz0VocUC&dq=false&pg=PR7).
Kenneth L. Judd, 1998. Numerical Methods in Economics, MIT Press. Description (https://web.arc
hive.org/web/20020923144108/http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=325
7) and chapter-preview links (https://books.google.com/books?id=9Wxk_z9HskAC&pg=PR7).
Michael Carter, 2001. Foundations of Mathematical Economics, MIT Press. Contents (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=KysvrGGfzq0C&pg=PR7=onepage).
Ferenc Szidarovszky and Sándor Molnár, 2002. Introduction to Matrix Theory: With Applications to
Business and Economics, World Scientific Publishing. Description (http://www.worldscientific.com/
worldscibooks/10.1142/4595) and preview (http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/suppl/10.1142/4595/
suppl_file/4595_chap01.pdf).
D. Wade Hands, 2004. Introductory Mathematical Economics, 2nd ed. Oxford. Contents (http://ww
w.oup.com/us/catalog/he/subject/Economics/OtherCourses/MathematicalEconomics/?view=usa&
sf=toc&ci=9780195133783).
Giancarlo Gandolfo, [1997] 2009. Economic Dynamics, 4th ed., Springer. Description (https://ww
w.springer.com/economics/economic+theory/book/978-3-642-03862-4) and preview (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=ZMwXi67nhHQC&pg=PR9).
John Stachurski, 2009. Economic Dynamics: Theory and Computation, MIT Press. Description (ht
tps://web.archive.org/web/20120916032346/http://johnstachurski.net/book/book.html) and preview
(https://books.google.com/books?id=IzW5rSzlluIC&pg=PR7).

External links
Journal of Mathematical Economics Aims & Scope (http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescri
ption.cws_home/505577/description#description)
 Mathematical Economics and Financial Mathematics (https://curlie.org/Science/Math/Applications/
Mathematical_Economics_and_Financial_Mathematics/) at Curlie
Erasmus Mundus Master QEM - Models and Methods of Quantitative Economics (http://erasmus
mundus-qem.univ-paris1.fr/), The Models and Methods of Quantitative Economics - QEM

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mathematical_economics&oldid=1162238606"