Partage des coûts et tarification des infrastructures - Les méthodes de partage de coûts - Un survol
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we present the different cost sharing methods one can find in the economic literature. We regroup the methods into three sets : the proportional methods, the cooperative game theory methods and the serial cost sharing methods. All those methods are presented through the stylized example of a pipeline connecting the Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean and Beauce regions to Montreal, through Quebec city, capable of satisfying the needs of those three regions. Dans le présent document, on entreprend une présentation systématique des méthodes de partage qu'on retrouve dans la littérature économique. On les regroupe en trois catégories : les règles de proportionnalité, celles qui sont inspirées de la théorie des jeux coopératifs et celles de répartition séquentielle (serial cost sharing). Chacune des méthodes présentées est illustrée à l'aide d'un exemple, celui d'un gazoduc qui relierait le Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean et la Beauce à Montréal, en passant par Québec, capable de desservir ces trois régions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it