MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135402714 · doi:10.1080/00036840701591361

A modified, implicit, directly additive demand system

2007· article· en· W2135402714 on OpenAlexaff
Paul V. Preckel, John Cranfield, Thomas W. Hertel

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Economics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomics of Agriculture and Food Markets
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsSubsistence agricultureConsumption (sociology)EconometricsConsumer demandClothingAlmost ideal demand systemMicroeconomicsAgricultural economicsRange (aeronautics)Production (economics)Ecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A recently developed demand system, nicknamed AIDADS (An Implicit, Directly Additive Demand System), offers an approach to capturing consumer preferences across a wide range of expenditure levels. AIDADS generalizes the LES by assuming marginal budget shares vary with utility and hence with expenditure. Like the LES, AIDADS includes subsistence parameters that define minimum consumption levels. Here we present a modified AIDADS (MAIDADS) that replaces the constant subsistence parameters with functions that also vary with utility; these transformed subsistence levels are referred to as minimum consumption quantities. This model is applied to the 1996 International Consumption Project data. As these data span a wide range of expenditure levels, MAIDADS offers a viable alternative for the estimation of a ‘global demand system’. Results suggest minimum consumption quantities for staple grains, livestock, other food products, alcohol and tobacco, clothing and footwear and transport and transport services vary with expenditure, while those for rent and fuel and household furnishings and operations are zero and invariant across expenditure levels. Only the minimum consumption quantity for staple grains declines with expenditure.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.683
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied EconomicsSame topicEconomics of Agriculture and Food MarketsFrench-language works237,207