Score contribution per author:
α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count
This paper provides a model of beliefs representation in which ambiguity and unambiguity are endogenously distinguished in the maxmin expected utility model of Gilboa and Schmeidler (1989). Specifically, I first extend it by getting a representation of beliefs such that the probabilistic beliefs over each ambiguous event are represented by a nondegenerate interval, while the ones over each unambiguous event are represented by a number. I then suggest a behavioral definition of ambiguity. It provides a choice theoretical foundation for the Knightian distinction between ambiguity and unambiguity.