MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007779239 · doi:10.1111/1467-8454.00110

Divisionalisation and Cournot Competition Yield Bertrand Outcomes

2001· article· en· W2007779239 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Economic Papers · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMerger and Competition Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCournot competitionBertrand competitionPrecommitmentEconomicsBertrand paradox (economics)OligopolyCompetition (biology)MicroeconomicsHomogeneousYield (engineering)Mathematical economicsProduct differentiationMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bertrand and Cournot model are the main frameworks in the analysis of oligopolistic competition. The outcomes from them are however different. Using a simultaneous‐move two‐stage game, this article shows that, in a homogeneous product market with fairly general demand, the Bertrand outcomes can be achieved by a combination of divisionalisation and ensuing Cournot competition. This finding can be viewed as an extension to or complements of Kreps and Scheinkman (1983), who show that Cournot outcomes can be achieved by quantity precommitment and Bertrand competition.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.388
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.198 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it