MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057129345 · doi:10.1142/s0219198905000648

BECKMANN'S EDGEWORTH-BERTRAND DUOPOLY EXAMPLE REVISITED

2005· article· en· W2057129345 on OpenAlex
Alexei F. Cheviakov, John M. Hartwick

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

VenueInternational Game Theory Review · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicGame Theory and Applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsDuopolyBertrand competitionMicroeconomicsOrder (exchange)Limit priceMarket pricePrice levelMathematical economicsOligopolyMonetary economicsCournot competition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the Edgeworth-Bertrand price game, each player has a capacity output, faces the same market demand, and calls out a price. The high-price caller gets some residual market at her price. The low-price caller gets her capacity at her price or all of the market. We re-work Beckmann's closed form solution to his symmetric version of this game, mostly in mixed strategies, and observe that expected price played by a player declines with the size of her exogenously given capacity.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.011

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.300 · 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