{"id":"W2105717803","doi":"10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.09.008","title":"Alternative approaches to dealing with respondent uncertainty in contingent valuation: A comparative analysis","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Environmental Management","topic":"Economic and Environmental Valuation","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":42,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"ca_institutions":"Memorial University of Newfoundland","funders":"Memorial University of Newfoundland","keywords":"Respondent; Contingent valuation; Willingness to pay; Certainty; Payment card; Econometrics; Valuation (finance); Payment; Actuarial science; Point estimation; Computer science; Economics; Statistics; Mathematics; Microeconomics","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009098966,0.0001436143,0.0004064291,0.0005628308,0.00004198359,0.00002082401,0.0001855003,0.00002649219,0.0006775698],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000002327644,0.0001407883,0.0001212085,0.0001799912,0.0000466437,0.0002112956,0.00008058413,0.00009747873,0.0001199065],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0005796758,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000002405277,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00006725438,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00004651241,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9986714,0.00003411811,0.0007584622,0.000264549,0.000104147,0.0001673698],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990779,0.00001748201,0.000652887,0.0001626215,0.000002664765,0.00008641774],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0004784616,0.000715523,0.6336819,0.00001139373,0.002107014,0.00004584841,0.01018845,0.2940195,0.00001542233,0.05663443,0.00001617936,0.002085908],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001267475,0.000399368,0.9823464,0.00002300238,0.0001775617,0.000006859285,0.003715198,0.005432034,0.0001205226,0.005914995,0.0003723858,0.0002241974],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9706008,0.0002522051,0.01723556,0.00009145616,0.00006680196,0.0003297565,0.00001698021,0.000002547334,0.01140384],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9927353,0.00008509354,0.006774892,0.00009145607,0.00002377157,0.00002168373,0.000005927024,0.00000867993,0.0002531853],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.3486645,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7418914,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.3391467352203044,"score_gpt":0.2403769887426893,"score_spread":0.09876974647761508,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}