MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Social interactions in small groups

2006· article· en· W2146756943 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicGame Theory and Applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeer groupGroup (periodic table)Youth smokingRange (aeronautics)Social psychologyValue (mathematics)Variation (astronomy)Degree (music)Social influencePsychologyEthnic groupEconometricsEconomicsMathematicsStatisticsPhysicsSociologyEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most models of endogenous social interactions implicitly assume that individuals are interacting directly or indirectly with a very large (innite) group of others. These models generally feature multiple equilibria when the marginal impact of peers exceeds some strictly positive critical value. This paper shows that this result depends critically on the assumption that the size of the peer group is large, and analyzes the properties of an alternative model in which the peer groups are small (nite). I nd that when peer groups are small, multiple equilibria exist for any positive degree of peer influence. A brief application to the variation in youth smoking rates by ethnicity demonstrates the potential interaction of group size and strength of peer eect in generating a wide range of equilibrium behavior.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.314
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.044 · 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