Talk:Envelope theorem

Economics Mid‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mathematics Low‑priority

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Unclear, rambling definition[edit]

In the first paragraph there needs to be an explicit statement of the theorem. "The Envelope theorem sates that..."

128.193.8.98 (talk) 09:36, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

could max be replaced by sup? 71.225.92.12 02:44, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe so. One of the ideas behind Envelope theorem is the explanation of how a maximum changes as those parameters that characterize it change. Perhaps subtly, this is different than a supremum. max entails finding that value of x in the domain which maximizes the objective function subject to a constraint, whereas sup would entail finding the least upper bound of a set (although some envelope theorem problems could likely be restated in terms of finding the sup of a subset of the domain, but this would be quite a different formulation). In this article, max is used correctly Bsdlite (talk) 04:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There should at least be an attempt at providing an explanation suitable for an undergrad-level student (and not "top US uni" undergrad) before proceeding to the more complex part of the article. --Santiagoafonso (talk) 14:28, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Explain "envelope"[edit]

A sensible addition, I think, would be an explanation of what this theorem has to do with an "envelope" of functions (ie, explain the name). TBH, I have only a vague understanding of this, so I haven't made a stab.

Danm1130 (talk) 17:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, It would be great if someone talked about why this was called the envelope theorem and also included a proof. 203.167.251.186 (talk) 02:36, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to add this information. The proof is simple and instructive. 219.89.240.49 (talk) 01:58, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i tried explaining why is it called an envelope . will keep adding more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zenith ay (talk • contribs) 07:06, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate to see a labeled diagram depicting this "envelope".98.156.185.48 (talk) 22:06, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Author(s)[edit]

Who first proved those results and were?Lbertolotti (talk) 10:45, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New material[edit]

I've reverted this edit ([1]) because it removed the lead etc, but there may be some material in that edit that could be used. DexDor (talk) 12:41, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]