MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2196574231

Should Firms Bundle Bloatware with Consumer Electronics? – Implications for Product Pricing and Consumer Surplus

2015· article· en· W2196574231 on OpenAlexaff
Hasan Cavusoglu, Huseyin Cavusoglu, Xianjun Geng

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDigital Platforms and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonopolistic competitionBundleBusinessEconomic surplusProduct (mathematics)Industrial organizationCost reductionPricing strategiesMicroeconomicsMarketingEconomicsMonopoly
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates bloatware bundling and product pricing decisions of a monopolistic firm when consumers can remove the bloatware from their electronic devices after purchase. We show conditions under which it is optimal for the firm not to bundle bloatware with their products. Furthermore, we show that even if the firm can make it harder for consumers to remove bloatware, the firm is not always better off by doing so. Consumers do not necessarily benefit from a reduced cost of bloatware removal either. In particular, if the reduction in the removal cost triggers the firm to change either its bloatware-inclusion strategy or its pricing strategy, the reduced removal cost may hurt consumers.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

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 communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.190 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Platforms and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207