MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793536574 · doi:10.1111/ijet.12139

Suzumura‐consistent relations: An overview

2018· article· en· W2793536574 on OpenAlexaff
Walter Bossert

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economic Theory · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGame Theory and Voting Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransitive relationProperty (philosophy)Consistency (knowledge bases)Binary relationMathematical economicsCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Social choice theoryContext (archaeology)Computer scienceEconomicsPositive economicsMicroeconomicsEpistemologyMathematicsArtificial intelligenceDiscrete mathematicsCombinatoricsPhilosophyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper provides a brief introduction to the use and usefulness of Suzumura consistency, a coherence requirement for binary relations that weakens transitivity. The property was introduced by Suzumura in the context of collective choice but, as demonstrated in some recent contributions, its applicability reaches beyond the boundaries of social‐choice theory. In addition to a summary of its mathematical underpinnings, some recent applications in individual and collective decision‐making are provided. Several examples are employed to illustrate the property and how it distinguishes itself from alternative weakenings of transitivity such as quasi‐transitivity or acyclicity.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economic TheorySame topicGame Theory and Voting SystemsFrench-language works237,207