Anders Karlström, Christer Persson
arXiv 2 Mar 2026 · Econometrics
arXiv:2603.01785 · PDF · DOI · OpenAlex · Extracted main text
Models of bounded rationality include quantum--like (QL) models, which use Hilbert--space amplitudes to represent context and order effects, and entropy--regularised (ER) models, including rational inattention, which smooth expected utility by adding an information cost. We develop a unified information--geometric framework in which both arise from the same structure on the probability simplex. Starting from the Fisher--Rao geometry of the open simplex $Δ^{n-1}$, we formulate least--action rationality (LAR) as a variational principle for decision dynamics in amplitude (square--root) coordinates and lift it to the cotangent phase space $N:=T^*\mathbb R^n$ of unnormalised amplitudes. The lift carries its canonical symplectic form and a para--Kähler geometry. For a linear evaluator $\widehat V=\widehat S+\widehat F$ with symmetric part $\widehat S$ and skew part $\widehat F$, the dynamics separate an evaluative channel from a circulatory (co--utility) channel. On a distinguished zero--residual Lagrangian leaf the flow closes as a split--complex (hyperbolic) Schrödinger--type evolution, and observable probabilities follow from a quadratic (Born--type) normalisation. When reduced to the simplex, the induced preference one--form decomposes into an exact utility component and a divergence--free co--utility component whose curvature measures path dependence. Context effects, order effects, and interference--like deviations from the law of total probability emerge as projections of this latent rational flow. Finally, standard complex (elliptic) quantum dynamics arises within this real symplectic phase space by imposing an additional Kähler polarisation that restricts admissible variations. Unitary evolution is thus a coherent restriction of the underlying least--action framework rather than a primitive postulate.
appendix boundary found by none_found · 100% of the source is main text. Read the extracted text to check this.
The works this paper leans on most, across its whole bibliography — not restricted to papers in our corpus. Ranked by composite intensity, which combines how often a work is mentioned, how many sections mention it, and how much of that falls in the main text rather than the appendix.
| Reference | Intensity | Mentions | Sections | Main text | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Russell, T (1991) Geometric Models Of Decision Making Under Uncertainty | 1.000 | 5 | 3 | 100% |
| 2 | Caticha, A (2021) Quantum Mechanics as Hamilton–Killing Flows on a Statistical Manifold | 0.843 | 3 | 3 | 100% |
| 3 | Khrennikov, A.\ (2000) 2018) | 0.737 | 3 | 2 | 100% |
| 4 | Aerts, D., Haven, E., & Sozzo, S (2018) A proposal to extend expected utility in a quantum probabilistic framework | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
| 5 | Busemeyer, J. R., & Bruza, P. D (2012) Quantum Models of Cognition and Decision | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
| 6 | La Mura, P (2009) Projective expected utility | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
| 7 | Luce, R. D (2003) Whatever happened to information theory in psychology? | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
| 8 | Reginatto, M (2013) From information to quanta: A derivation of the geometric formulation of quantum theory from information geometry | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
| 9 | Sims, C. A (2003) Implications of rational inattention | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
| 10 | Bruza, P. D., Kitto, K., Nelson, D., & McEvoy, C (2009) Is there something quantum-like about the human mental lexicon? | 0.511 | 2 | 1 | 100% |
Showing the top 10 of 55 scored citations.