Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The search for flexible models has led the simple multinomial logit model to evolve into the powerful but computationally very demanding mixed multinomial logit (MMNL) model. That flexibility search lead to discrete choice hybrid choice models (HCMs) formulations that explicitly incorporate psychological factors affecting decision making in order to enhance the behavioral representation of the choice process. It expands on standard choice models by including attitudes, opinions, and perceptions as psychometric latent variables. In this paper we describe the classical estimation technique for a simulated maximum likelihood (SML) solution of the HCM. To show its feasibility, we apply it to data of stated personal vehicle choices made by Canadian consumers when faced with technological innovations. We then go beyond classical methods, and estimate the HCM using a hierarchical Bayesian approach that exploits HCM Gibbs sampling considering both a probit and a MMNL discrete choice kernel. We then carry out a Monte Carlo experiment to test how the HCM Gibbs sampler works in practice. To our knowledge, this is the first practical application of HCM Bayesian estimation. We show that although HCM joint estimation requires the evaluation of complex multi-dimensional integrals, SML can be successfully implemented. The HCM framework not only proves to be capable of introducing latent variables, but also makes it possible to tackle the problem of measurement errors in variables in a very natural way. We also show that working with Bayesian methods has the potential to break down the complexity of classical estimation.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".