Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Perspective
  • Published:

The ergodicity problem in economics

Matters Arising to this article was published on 02 December 2020

An Author Correction to this article was published on 06 December 2019

This article has been updated

Abstract

The ergodic hypothesis is a key analytical device of equilibrium statistical mechanics. It underlies the assumption that the time average and the expectation value of an observable are the same. Where it is valid, dynamical descriptions can often be replaced with much simpler probabilistic ones — time is essentially eliminated from the models. The conditions for validity are restrictive, even more so for non-equilibrium systems. Economics typically deals with systems far from equilibrium — specifically with models of growth. It may therefore come as a surprise to learn that the prevailing formulations of economic theory — expected utility theory and its descendants — make an indiscriminate assumption of ergodicity. This is largely because foundational concepts to do with risk and randomness originated in seventeenth-century economics, predating by some 200 years the concept of ergodicity, which arose in nineteenth-century physics. In this Perspective, I argue that by carefully addressing the question of ergodicity, many puzzles besetting the current economic formalism are resolved in a natural and empirically testable way.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: A gamble is a random variable.
Fig. 2: Randomly generated trajectories of the repeated example gamble.
Fig. 3: Posterior probability density functions for the parameter η in the Copenhagen experiment.

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 06 December 2019

    An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

References

  1. Ore, O. Cardano the Gambling Scholar (Princeton Univ. Press, 1953).

  2. Devlin, K. The Unfinished Game (Basic Books, 2008).

  3. Montmort, P. R. Essay d’analyse sur les jeux de hazard 2nd edn (Jacque Quillau, 1713; reprinted by American Mathematical Society, 2006).

  4. Peters, O. & Gell-Mann, M. Evaluating gambles using dynamics. Chaos 26, 23103 (2016).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Bernoulli, D. Exposition of a new theory on the measurement of risk. Econometrica 22, 23–36 (1954).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Laplace, P. S. Théorie analytique des probabilités 2nd edn (Courcier, 1814).

  7. von Neumann, J. & Morgenstern, O. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (Princeton Univ. Press, 1944).

  8. Samuelson, P. A. A note on measurement of utility. Rev. Econ. Stud. 4, 155–161 (1937).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Frederick, S., Loewenstein, G. & O’Donoghue, T. Time discounting and time preferences: a critical review. J. Econ. Lit. 40, 351–401 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. West, G. B., Brown, J. H. & Enquist, B. J. A general model for ontogenetic growth. Nature 413, 628–631 (2001).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  11. Meder, D. et al. Ergodicity-breaking reveals time optimal economic behavior in humans. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.04652 (2019).

  12. Lee, M. D. & Wagenmakers, E.-J. Bayesian Cognitive Modeling (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).

  13. Jensen, J. L. W. V. Sur les fonctions convexes et les inégalités entre les valeurs moyennes. Acta Math. 30, 175–193 (1906).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Whitworth, W. A. Choice and Chance 2nd edn (D. Bell and Co., 1870)

  15. Itô, K. Stochastic integral. Proc. Imp. Acad. 20, 519–524 (1944).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Kelly, J. L. A new interpretation of information rate. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 35, 917–926 (1956).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Gell-Mann, M. A schematic model of baryons and mesons. Phys. Lett. 8, 214–215 (1964).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  18. Adamou, A., Berman, Y., Mavroyiannis, D. & Peters, O. Microfoundations of discounting. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.02137 (2019).

  19. Peters, O. & Adamou, A. The time interpretation of expected utility theory. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1801.03680 (2018).

  20. Peters, O. & Adamou, A. Leverage efficiency. Preprint at http://arXiv.org/abs/1101.4548 (2011).

  21. Peters, O. & Adamou, A. Lecture notes. Ergodicity Economics https://ergodicityeconomics.com/lecture-notes/ (2018).

  22. Peters, O. & Adamou, A. An evolutionary advantage of cooperation. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.03414 (2018).

  23. Berman, Y., Peters, O. & Adamou, A. An empirical test of the ergodic hypothesis: wealth distributions in the United States. SSRN https://ssrn.com/abstract=2794830 (2017).

  24. Marsili, M., Maslov, S. & Zhang, Y.-C. Dynamical optimization theory of a diversified portfolio. Physica A 253, 403–418 (1998).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  25. Bouchaud, J.-P. & Mézard, M. Wealth condensation in a simple model of economy. Physica A 282, 536–545 (2000).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  26. Theil, H. Economics and Information Theory (North-Holland Publishing Company, 1967).

  27. Adamou, A. & Peters, O. Dynamics of inequality. Significance 13, 32–35 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ole Peters.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Peters, O. The ergodicity problem in economics. Nat. Phys. 15, 1216–1221 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-019-0732-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-019-0732-0

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing AI and Robotics

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: AI and Robotics newsletter — what matters in AI and robotics research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: AI and Robotics