Mathematical Foundations II

Similar documents
Mathematical Foundations -1- Constrained Optimization. Constrained Optimization. An intuitive approach 2. First Order Conditions (FOC) 7

Firms and returns to scale -1- John Riley

Mathematical Foundations -1- Supporting hyperplanes. SUPPORTING HYPERPLANES Key Ideas: Bounding hyperplane for a convex set, supporting hyperplane

Firms and returns to scale -1- Firms and returns to scale

Microeconomic Theory -1- Introduction

14 March 2018 Module 1: Marginal analysis and single variable calculus John Riley. ( x, f ( x )) are the convex combinations of these two

1.4 FOUNDATIONS OF CONSTRAINED OPTIMIZATION

CHAPTER 1-2: SHADOW PRICES

Basic mathematics of economic models. 3. Maximization

Mathematical Foundations -1- Convexity and quasi-convexity. Convex set Convex function Concave function Quasi-concave function Supporting hyperplane

The Envelope Theorem

CHAPTER 3: OPTIMIZATION

Mathematical Economics: Lecture 16

Seminars on Mathematics for Economics and Finance Topic 5: Optimization Kuhn-Tucker conditions for problems with inequality constraints 1

Nonlinear Programming and the Kuhn-Tucker Conditions

GARP and Afriat s Theorem Production

Industrial Organization, Fall 2011: Midterm Exam Solutions and Comments Date: Wednesday October

The Kuhn-Tucker Problem

Advanced Microeconomic Analysis, Lecture 6

Simplifying this, we obtain the following set of PE allocations: (x E ; x W ) 2

ECON 255 Introduction to Mathematical Economics

where u is the decision-maker s payoff function over her actions and S is the set of her feasible actions.

October 16, 2018 Notes on Cournot. 1. Teaching Cournot Equilibrium

Introduction to General Equilibrium: Framework.

Lecture 4: Optimization. Maximizing a function of a single variable

ECONOMICS 207 SPRING 2008 PROBLEM SET 13

Economics 101. Lecture 2 - The Walrasian Model and Consumer Choice

Market Equilibrium and the Core

Mathematical Preliminaries for Microeconomics: Exercises

Optimization. A first course on mathematics for economists

Answer Key: Problem Set 1

THE FIRM: OPTIMISATION

Final Exam - Math Camp August 27, 2014

Microeconomics, Block I Part 1

Index. Cambridge University Press An Introduction to Mathematics for Economics Akihito Asano. Index.

EC487 Advanced Microeconomics, Part I: Lecture 2

September Math Course: First Order Derivative

is a maximizer. However this is not the case. We will now give a graphical argument explaining why argue a further condition must be satisfied.

The Firm: Optimisation

Lecture 1: Introduction to IO Tom Holden

Advanced Microeconomic Analysis Solutions to Midterm Exam

Econ 201: Problem Set 3 Answers

Microeconomic Theory. Microeconomic Theory. Everyday Economics. The Course:

1 Theory of the Firm: Topics and Exercises

Paul Schrimpf. October 17, UBC Economics 526. Constrained optimization. Paul Schrimpf. First order conditions. Second order conditions

EC /11. Math for Microeconomics September Course, Part II Lecture Notes. Course Outline

II. An Application of Derivatives: Optimization

CHAPTER 2: CONVEX SETS AND CONCAVE FUNCTIONS. W. Erwin Diewert January 31, 2008.

Week 10: Theory of the Firm (Jehle and Reny, Chapter 3)

ANSWER KEY 2 GAME THEORY, ECON 395

Econ Slides from Lecture 10

1 General Equilibrium

MATHEMATICS FOR ECONOMISTS. Course Convener. Contact: Office-Hours: X and Y. Teaching Assistant ATIYEH YEGANLOO

Exercises - SOLUTIONS UEC Advanced Microeconomics, Fall 2018 Instructor: Dusan Drabik, de Leeuwenborch 2105

Econ Slides from Lecture 14

Week 7: The Consumer (Malinvaud, Chapter 2 and 4) / Consumer November Theory 1, 2015 (Jehle and 1 / Reny, 32

How to Characterize Solutions to Constrained Optimization Problems

Optimization Theory. Lectures 4-6

Nonlinear Programming (NLP)

Properties of Walrasian Demand

OPTIMIZATION THEORY IN A NUTSHELL Daniel McFadden, 1990, 2003

Rules of Differentiation

Week 3: Sets and Mappings/Calculus and Optimization (Jehle September and Reny, 20, 2015 Chapter A1/A2)

2. Which of the following is the ECONOMISTS inverse of the function y = 9/x 2 (i.e. find x as a function of y, x = f(y))

Simon Fraser University, Department of Economics, Econ 201, Prof. Karaivanov FINAL EXAM Answer key

Economics 401 Sample questions 2

General Equilibrium and Welfare

School of Business. Blank Page

Structural Properties of Utility Functions Walrasian Demand

Revealed Preference Tests of the Cournot Model

Oligopoly. Firm s Profit Maximization Firm i s profit maximization problem: Static oligopoly model with n firms producing homogenous product.

3. THE EXCHANGE ECONOMY

1.3 The Indirect Utility Function

On revealed preferences in oligopoly games

3.2 THE FUNDAMENTAL WELFARE THEOREMS

Oligopoly Notes. Simona Montagnana

Economics th April 2011

BEEM103 UNIVERSITY OF EXETER. BUSINESS School. January 2009 Mock Exam, Part A. OPTIMIZATION TECHNIQUES FOR ECONOMISTS solutions

Constrained Optimization and Lagrangian Duality

EconS 501 Final Exam - December 10th, 2018

In the Name of God. Sharif University of Technology. Microeconomics 1. Graduate School of Management and Economics. Dr. S.

Econ 58 Gary Smith Spring Final Exam Answers

Homework 3 Suggested Answers

5.1 THE ROBINSON CRUSOE ECONOMY

EC /11. Math for Microeconomics September Course, Part II Problem Set 1 with Solutions. a11 a 12. x 2

Duality. for The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd ed. Lawrence E. Blume

FACULTY OF ARTS AND SCIENCE University of Toronto FINAL EXAMINATIONS, APRIL 2016 MAT 133Y1Y Calculus and Linear Algebra for Commerce

Advanced Microeconomic Theory. Chapter 6: Partial and General Equilibrium

Economics 501B Final Exam Fall 2017 Solutions

Hidden information. Principal s payoff: π (e) w,

General Equilibrium. General Equilibrium, Berardino. Cesi, MSc Tor Vergata

The Ohio State University Department of Economics. Homework Set Questions and Answers

Principles in Economics and Mathematics: the mathematical part

Chapter 4: Production Theory

x 1 1 and p 1 1 Two points if you just talk about monotonicity (u (c) > 0).

EconS 301. Math Review. Math Concepts

8. Constrained Optimization

Optimality Conditions

The Kuhn-Tucker and Envelope Theorems

Lecture 1: Entropy, convexity, and matrix scaling CSE 599S: Entropy optimality, Winter 2016 Instructor: James R. Lee Last updated: January 24, 2016

Transcription:

Mathematical Foundations 2-1- Mathematical Foundations II A. Level and superlevel sets 2 B. Convex sets and concave functions 4 C. Parameter changes: Envelope Theorem I 17 D. Envelope Theorem II 41 48 pages

Mathematical Foundations 2-2- A. Level and superlevel sets of a function S x x h x h x 0 0 ( ) { ( ) ( )} Superlevel set of a function S x x h x h x 0 0 ( ) { ( ) ( )}

Mathematical Foundations 2-3- Sublevel set of a function S x x h x h x 0 0 ( ) { ( ) ( )}

Mathematical Foundations 2-4- B. Convex sets and concave functions Convex combination of two vectors Consider any two vectors written as follows. 0 z and 1 z. The set of weighted average of these two vectors can be z (1 ) z z 0 1, 0 1 Such averages where the weighs are both strictly positive and add to 1 are called the convex combinations of 0 z and 1 z.

Mathematical Foundations 2-5- B. Convex sets and concave functions Convex combination of two vectors Consider any two vectors written as follows. 0 z and 1 z. The set of weighted average of these two vectors can be z (1 ) z z 0 1, 0 1 Such averages where the weighs are both strictly positive and add to 1 are called the convex combinations of Convex set 0 z and 1 z. The set n S is convex if for any 0 z and 1 z in S, every convex combination is also in S A convex set

Mathematical Foundations 2-6- Concave functions of 1 variable Definition: Linear approximation of the function f at 0 x f x f x f x x x. ( ) ( 0 ) ( 0 )( 0 ) L Note that the linear approximation has the same value at 0 x and the same first derivative (the slope.) In the figure f ( x ) is a line tangent to the graph of the function. L

Mathematical Foundations 2-7- Concave functions of 1 variable Definition: Linear approximation of the function f at 0 x f x f x f x x x. ( ) ( 0 ) ( 0 )( 0 ) L Note that the linear approximation has the same value at 0 x and the same first derivative (the slope.) In the figure f ( x ) is a line tangent to the graph of the function. L Definition 1: Concave Function A differentiable function f defined on an interval X is concave if f ( x), the derivative of f( x ) is decreasing.

Mathematical Foundations 2-8- The three types of differentiable concave function are depicted below. Note that in each case the linear approximations at any point 0 x lie above the graph of the function.

Mathematical Foundations 2-9- The three types of differentiable concave function are depicted below. Note that in each case the linear approximations at any point 0 x lie above the graph of the function. While we will not formally prove it, the following is an equivalent definition. Definition 2: Concave Function A differentiable function f defined on an interval X is concave if the tangent lines lie above the graph of the function, i.e. for any f x f x f x x x 0 x 0 0 0 ( ) ( ) ( )( ) X

Mathematical Foundations 2-10- Consider the two points 0 0 0 z ( x, f ( x )) and 1 1 1 z ( x, f ( x )) depicted below. The convex combination is 0 0 1 1 0 1 (1 )( x, f ( x )) ( x, f ( x )) ( x,(1 ) f ( x ) f ( x )). In the figure, the convex combination is on the line segment oining the two points.

Mathematical Foundations 2-11- Consider the two points 0 0 0 z ( x, f ( x )) and 1 1 1 z ( x, f ( x )) depicted below. The convex combination is 0 0 1 1 0 1 (1 )( x, f ( x )) ( x, f ( x )) ( x,(1 ) f ( x ) f ( x )). In the figure, the convex combination is on the line segment oining the two points. For a concave function, it is clear from the figure that this line segment must lie below the graph of the function. i.e. 0 1 f ( x ) (1 ) f ( x ) f ( x ).

Mathematical Foundations 2-12- In fact this is another equivalent definition. Definition 3: Concave Function A function x, f defined on an interval X is concave if, for any 0 1 x, x X and any convex combination f x f x f x 0 1 ( ) (1 ) ( ) ( )

Mathematical Foundations 2-13- Concave functions of n variables Propositions 1. The sum of concave functions is concave 2. If f is linear (i.e. f ( x) a0 b x ) and g is concave then h( x) g( f ( x)) is concave. 3. An increasing concave function of a concave function is concave. 4. If f( x ) is homogeneous of degree 1 (i.e. f ( x) f ( x) for all 0 ) and for some increasing function g(), h( x) g( f ( x)) is concave, then f( x ) is concave.

Mathematical Foundations 2-14- Convex functions Convex combinations, convex sets and convex functions. You have got to be kidding. How confusing is that? I think it is best to think of a convex function as being the opposite of a concave function Definition: Convex Function A function x, f defined on an interval X is convex if, for any 0 1 x, x X and any convex combination f x f x f x 0 1 ( ) (1 ) ( ) ( ) Remark: As you can show by rearranging the terms in the inequality, a function f( x ) is convex if and only if f() x is concave.

Mathematical Foundations 2-15- Proposition If f( x ) is concave, and x satisfies the necessary conditions for the maximization problem Max{ f ( x )} x then x solves the maximization problem. Proposition If f( x ) and hx ( ) are concave, and x satisfies the necessary conditions for the maximization problem Max{ f ( x) h( x) 0} x then x solves the constrained maximization problem. Remark: This result continues to hold if there are multiple constraints hi ( x) 0 and each function hi ( x ) is concave.

Mathematical Foundations 2-16- Group Exercise: Output maximization with a fixed budget A plant has the CES production function F( z) ( z z ). 1/2 1/2 2 1 2 The CEO gives the plant manager a budget B and instructs her to maximize output. The input price vector is r ( r1, r2). Solve for the maximum output q( r, B ). Class Exercise: What is the firm s cost function

Mathematical Foundations 2-17- C. Parameter Changes and the Envelope Theorem Impact of a parameter change on the maximized value Consider a profit-maximizing multi-product firm. The market for one of the outputs is competitive market, i.e. the firm has so little monopoly power that it takes the output price as given. We call such a firm a price taker in this market. Let q( p ) be the firm s supply function, i.e. the profit-maximizing output when the price is p current price is ˆp so the profit maximizing output is qˆ q( pˆ). As the output price rises, how rapidly does maximized profit rise? p. The

Mathematical Foundations 2-18- D. Parameter Changes and the Envelope Theorem Impact of a parameter change on the maximized value Consider a profit-maximizing multi-product firm. The market for one of the outputs is competitive market, i.e. the firm has so little monopoly power that it takes the output price as given. We call such a firm a price taker in this market. Let q( p ) be the firm s supply function, i.e. the profit-maximizing output when the price is p current price is ˆp so the profit maximizing output is qˆ q( pˆ). As the output price rises, how rapidly does maximized profit rise? Naïve answer: Don t change output then cost is constant so the extra profit is the extra revenue R ( p pˆ ) qˆ pqˆ p. The Therefore p ˆq

Mathematical Foundations 2-19- E. Parameter Changes and the Envelope Theorem Impact of a parameter change on the maximized value Consider a profit-maximizing multi-product firm. The market for one of the outputs is competitive market, i.e. the firm has so little monopoly power that it takes the output price p as given. We call such a firm a price taker in this market. Let q( p ) be the firm s supply function, i.e. the profit-maximizing output when the price is p current price is ˆp so the profit maximizing output is qˆ q( pˆ). As the output price rises, how rapidly does maximized profit rise? Naïve answer: Don t change output then cost is constant so the extra profit is the extra revenue R ( p pˆ ) qˆ pqˆ. The Therefore p ˆq Sophisticated answer: For any finite price change equal to the new price. Therefore p, the firm can do better by increasing the output until marginal cost is pqˆ and so p ˆq

Mathematical Foundations 2-20- Super sophisticated argument The naïve profit (with output constant) is N ( p) ( pˆ ) qˆ ( p pˆ ). This the line of slope ˆq depicted opposite. Maximized profit, ( p) is the same at ˆp and Greater for all p pˆ. slope =

Mathematical Foundations 2-21- Super sophisticated argument The naïve profit (with output constant) is N ( p) ( pˆ ) qˆ ( p pˆ ). This the line of slope ˆq depicted opposite. Maximized profit, ( p) is the same at ˆp and Greater for all p pˆ. slope = The only way this can be true is if the line and the curve have the same slope at We have therefore proved that N d d ( pˆ ) ( pˆ ) qˆ q( pˆ ). dp dp This argument holds for any price ˆp. Therefore d ( p) q( p) dp ˆp. Thus the rate at which maximized profit rises is the rate predicted by the naïve analysis.

Mathematical Foundations 2-22- The naïve profit lines are depicted for three different prices. Maximized profit touches all three lines.

Mathematical Foundations 2-23- The naïve profit lines are depicted for three different prices. Maximized profit touches all three lines. In the second figure the naïve profit lines are drawn for many prices. In the limit, maximized profit is an upper envelope of all these lines. The result that we have derived is thus called an Envelope Theorem.

Mathematical Foundations 2-24- Summary: Suppose that q( ) solves Max{ ( q, p) q Q}. q The maximized value of the maximand V ( p) Max{ ( p, q) q Q} q is called the value function. Envelope Theorem: If q( p ) is continuous then the slope of the value function is V ( p) ( p, q( p)) p

Mathematical Foundations 2-25- Another look at the profit maximizing firm For any output price p, the firm chooses an optimal response q( p) to maximize ( q, p) pq C( q). We consider the case in which q( p1 ) 0. The price rises to p 2. The two curves 1 ( p, q) and ( p2, q) are depicted. The profit-maximizing outputs are the outputs where the slope of each profit function is zero. The heavy green line segment is the naïve increase in profit (output remains at q( p 1) ). Note that it is an underestimate of the increase in maximized profit (shown in red.) However note that the slope of each profit curve is close to zero near the maximum. So the error in using the naïve answer is small. The Envelope Theorem reveals that in the limit, there is no error.

Mathematical Foundations 2-26- Calculus proof For a calculus proof, note that maximized profit is ( p) ( p, q( p)) With q( p1 ) 0 the FOC for a maximum is ( p, q( p)) 0 q We totally differentiate ( p) ( p, q( p)) pq C( q). There is the direct effect of the price change on the profit function and the effect on the maximizing output as the price rises. d dq ( p) ( p, q( p)) ( p, q( p)) dp p q dp Note that ( p, q( p)) q( p) p and ( p, q( p)) 0. q Therefore d ( p) q( p) dp

Mathematical Foundations 2-27- A third look at the profit maximizing firm pq c( q) p MC( q) q ++

Mathematical Foundations 2-28- Profit maximizing firm pq c( q) p MC( q) q Let be the increase in profit if the price rises by Note that q ( p) p q ( p p) p p +

Mathematical Foundations 2-29- Profit maximizing firm pq c( q) p MC( q) q Let be the increase in profit if the price rises by Note that q ( p) p q ( p p) p p Therefore ( ) ( ). So if p q p q p p d q ( p ) is continuous, q( p) dp

Mathematical Foundations 2-30- Envelope Theorem I Suppose that ( ) x uniquely solves Max{ f ( x, ) x X} for each A. x0 Define F ( ) f ( x ( ), ) If x ( ) is continuous then df f ( x ( ), ). d ++++

Mathematical Foundations 2-31- Envelope Theorem I Suppose that ( ) x uniquely solves Max{ f ( x, ) x X} for each A. x0 Define F ( ) f ( x ( ), ) If x ( ) is continuous then df f ( x ( ), ). d Proof: Consider any 1 and 2 and maximizers 1 x ( ) and 2 x ( ). Upper bound for F 2 1 ( ) F( ) 1 x ( ) is optimal with parameter 1 so f x 1 1 2 1 ( ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ). +++

Mathematical Foundations 2-32- Envelope Theorem I Suppose that ( ) x uniquely solves Max{ f ( x, ) x X} for each A. x0 Define F ( ) f ( x ( ), ) If x ( ) is continuous then df f ( x ( ), ). d Proof: Consider any 1 and 2 and maximizers 1 x ( ) and 2 x ( ). Upper bound for F 2 1 ( ) F( ) 1 x ( ) is optimal with parameter 1 so f x 1 1 2 1 ( ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ). Then F F f x f x f x f x 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 ( ) ( ) ( ( ), ) ( ( ), ) ( ( ), ) ( ( ), ) ++

Mathematical Foundations 2-33- Envelope Theorem I (feasible set is independent of the parameter) Suppose that ( ) x uniquely solves Max{ f ( x, ) x X} for each A. x0 Define F ( ) f ( x ( ), ) If x ( ) is continuous then df f ( x ( ), ). d Proof: Consider any 1 and 2 and maximizers 1 x ( ) and 2 x ( ). Upper bound for F 2 1 ( ) F( ) 1 x ( ) is optimal with parameter 1 so f x 1 1 2 1 ( ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ). Then F F f x f x f x f x 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 ( ) ( ) ( ( ), ) ( ( ), ) ( ( ), ) ( ( ), ) Lower bound for F 2 1 ( ) F( ) 2 2 x ( ) is optimal with parameter so f x 1 2 2 2 ( ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ). +

Mathematical Foundations 2-34- Envelope Theorem I Suppose that ( ) x uniquely solves Max{ f ( x, ) x X} for each A. x0 Define F ( ) f ( x ( ), ) If x ( ) is continuous then df f ( x ( ), ). d Proof: Consider any 1 and 2 and maximizers 1 x ( ) and 2 x ( ). Upper bound for F 2 1 ( ) F( ) 1 x ( ) is optimal with parameter 1 so f x 1 1 2 1 ( ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ). Then F F f x f x f x f x 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 ( ) ( ) ( ( ), ) ( ( ), ) ( ( ), ) ( ( ), ) Lower bound for F 2 1 ( ) F( ) 2 2 x ( ) is optimal with parameter so f x 1 2 2 2 ( ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ). Then F F f x f x f x f x 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 ( ) ( ) ( ( ), ) ( ( ), ) ( ( ), ) ( ( ), )

Mathematical Foundations 2-35- Combining these results f ( x ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ) F( ) F( ) f ( x ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ) 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 +++

Mathematical Foundations 2-36- Combining these results f ( x ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ) F( ) F( ) f ( x ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ) 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 Therefore, 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 f ( x ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ) F( 2) F( 1) f ( x ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ) 2 1 2 1 2 1 ++

Mathematical Foundations 2-37- Combining these results f ( x ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ) F( ) F( ) f ( x ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ) 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 Therefore, 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 f ( x ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ) F( 2) F( 1) f ( x ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ) 2 1 2 1 2 1 By assumption x ( ) is continuous at 1. Taking the limit, f df f d 1 1 1 1 1 ( x ( ), ) ( ) ( x ( ), ). Q.E.D. +

Mathematical Foundations 2-38- Combining these results f ( x ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ) F( ) F( ) f ( x ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ) 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 Therefore, 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 f ( x ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ) F( 2) F( 1) f ( x ( ), ) f ( x ( ), ) 2 1 2 1 2 1 By assumption x ( ) is continuous at 1. Taking the limit, f df f d 1 1 1 1 1 ( x ( ), ) ( ) ( x ( ), ). Q.E.D.

Mathematical Foundations 2-39- Envelope Theorem for a minimization problem Suppose that ( ) x uniquely solves Min{ f ( x, ) x X} for each A. x0 Define F ( ) f ( x ( ), ) If x ( ) is continuous then df f ( x ( ), ). d To show this is true one can use the method of proof above. All the inequalities are reversed. Or note that if f( x, ) is being minimized, then f( x, ) is being maximized.

Mathematical Foundations 2-40- Application: The impact of an input price rise on marginal cost and hence output C( r, q) Min{ r z F( z) q 0} z

Mathematical Foundations 2-41- Application: The impact of an input price rise on marginal cost and hence output C( r, q) Min{ r z F( z) q 0} Since the feasible set X { z F( z) q 0} z is independent of the price vector we can appeal to Envelope Theorem I. C r q z r q r (, ) (, )

Mathematical Foundations 2-42- Application: The impact of an input price rise on marginal cost and hence output C( r, q) Min{ r z F( z) q 0} z Since the feasible set is independent of the price vector we can appeal to Envelope Theorem I. C r q z r q r (, ) (, ) Differentiate both sides by q C C z MC ( ) ( ) r r q q r q. Thus marginal cost may fall as an input price rises It depends upon whether the -th input is a normal or inferior input

Mathematical Foundations 2-43- D: Envelope Theorem when the feasible set and maximand vary with the parameter F( ) Max{ f ( x, ) x X ( )} x0 X ( ) { x h ( x, ) 0, i 1,..., m} i Envelope Theorem II Define F( ) Max{ f ( x, ) x 0, h ( x, ) 0, i 1,..., m} where x i f, h 2 If x ( ) and ( ) are continuously differentiable functions, then df L ( x ( ), ( ), ). d

Mathematical Foundations 2-44- Proof: We consider the one constraint case. An almost identical proof can be constructed with multiple constraints. The Lagrangian is Since L x f x h x ( ( ), ) ( ( ), ) ( ) ( ( ), ) x ( ) solves the maximization problem, the FOC must hold. Appealing to complementary slackness, the second term is zero. Therefore F f x L x ( ) ( ( ), ) ( ( ), ) We differentiate this equation as follows: n df d L dx L d L ( ) Lx ( ( ), ). d d x d d 1 Suppose that the constraint is binding and x ( ) 0 Then, from the FOC each term on the right hand side except the last is zero. Therefore df L ( ) d

Mathematical Foundations 2-45- Complete proof: This is provided for any student who may be interested. We consider the one constraint case. An almost identical proof can be constructed with multiple constraints. As argued above, Therefore F f x L x ( ) ( ( ), ) ( ( ), ) n df d L dx L d L ( ) Lx ( ( ), ). d d x d d 1

Mathematical Foundations 2-46- The FOC are L x x ( ( ), ) 0 with equality if x ( ) 0 (1) L x ( ( ), ) h ( x ( ), ) 0 with equality if 0 (2)

Mathematical Foundations 2-47- The FOC are L x x ( ( ), ) 0 with equality if x ( ) 0 (1) L x ( ( ), ) h ( x ( ), ) 0 with equality if 0 (2) Suppose that k of the conditions in (1) hold with strict inequality. Re-label the variables so that the L strict inequality holds for the first k variables. Since ( x ( ), ) 0 for 1,..., k, it follows that x x ( ) 0, 1,..., k.

Mathematical Foundations 2-48- The FOC are L x x ( ( ), ) 0 with equality if x ( ) 0 (1) L x ( ( ), ) h ( x ( ), ) 0 with equality if 0 (2) Suppose that k of the conditions in (1) hold with strict inequality. Re-label the variables so that the L strict inequality holds for the first k variables. Since ( x ( ), ) 0 for 1,..., k, it follows that x x ( ) 0, 1,..., k. Also, given the continuity assumption, for sufficiently small L x x ( ( ), ) 0. Therefore x ( ) 0 Thus for the first k variables there is no change in x and so dx ( ) 0. d

Mathematical Foundations 2-49- The FOC are L x x ( ( ), ) 0 with equality if x ( ) 0 (1) L x ( ( ), ) h ( x ( ), ) 0 with equality if 0 (2) Suppose that k of the conditions in (1) hold with strict inequality. Re-label the variables so that the L strict inequality holds for the first k variables. Since ( x ( ), ) 0 for 1,..., k, it follows that x x ( ) 0, 1,..., k. Also, given the continuity assumption, for sufficiently small L x x ( ( ), ) 0. Therefore x ( ) 0 Thus for the first k variables there is no change in x and so dx ( ) 0. d L For the remaining variables 0. Thus for all, x L dx ( ) 0 x d

Mathematical Foundations 2-50- Case (i) Case (ii) L hx ( ( ), ) 0 L hx ( ( ), ) 0 and so ( ) 0 In this case, for sufficiently small ( ) 0 the constraint is still not binding at x ( ) and so d Therefore ( ) ( ) and so ( ) 0. d Combining the two cases, it follows that Ld 0 d. k n df d L dx L dx L d L ( ) Lx ( ( ), ) d d x d x d d. 1 k1 From the above arguments, each of the terms on the right hand side except the last one is zero. Therefore df L ( ) d