MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783143417 · doi:10.5539/res.v10n1p25

The Modified Baumol Equation: Theory and Evidence

2018· article· en· W2783143417 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tchai Tavor, Limor Dina Gonen, Michal Weber, Uriel Spiegel

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic theories and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCashDatabase transactionEconomicsPurchasingStructural equation modelingTransaction costMicroeconomicsPosition (finance)Simultaneous equations modelEconometricsComputer scienceOperations managementFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Baumol developed an equation of demand for money for the transaction motive. It is affected positively by cost per withdrawal and negatively by the interest loss resulting from holding cash. The present paper suggests modifying the basic and simplified Baumol approach by adding another element to the transaction equation. Availability of cash encourages spontaneous purchases resulting in customer losses. Through cost minimization with respect to three elements instead of two as in the original Baumol equation, a new modified Baumol equation was created. It is examined by using an empirical data set and the results support the modified version of the Baumol equation. Customers respond positively to cash availability when they spend more on luxury goods. This is prominent especially among unmarried and most likely young customers. Due to high-income elasticity, spontaneous purchasing is higher among wealthier customers and full-time workers who maintain a steady and secure employment position. Since such customers have a weakness for spontaneously and sometimes even carelessly buying luxury items, from their point of view they create a good and efficient buffer by decreasing the available cash in hand and thereby reducing or possibly even preventing their wasteful behavior. The new version is robust and statistically more significant than the original equation presented in 1952.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.191
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.125 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European StudiesSame topicEconomic theories and modelsFrench-language works237,207