MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2408863500 · doi:10.1111/1467-8454.12072

Optimal Intertemporal Consumption and Involuntary Memories of Consumption

2016· article· en· W2408863500 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Economic Papers · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConsumption (sociology)EconomicsTime horizonExpected utility hypothesisComputer scienceMathematical economicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent studies introduce the notion of treating autobiographical memories of past pleasurable experiences as assets and expanding the discounted utility model to include the utility of memories of past consumption. Recent studies in psychology have found that involuntary autobiographical memories are common in everyday life. This paper builds on these two strands in the literature by expanding the discounted utility model to include the utility of involuntary memories of past consumption. Optimal control theory is used to develop a continuous‐time optimal consumption model that takes into account the fact that consumption may generate involuntary memories that arrive at random times. The model is used in an in‐depth analysis of optimal consumption with memories. It is shown that memories shift consumption to earlier times. This effect gets weaker as the time horizon gets longer, and it vanishes entirely when the time horizon is infinite.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.212 · 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