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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Decision making in economics has been always intertwined with the concept of rationality. However, neoclassical economic literature has been dominated by a specific notion of rationality, namely, perfect rationality, characterized by the assumption of consistency and by the maximization hypothesis. Herbert Simon, in his long research activity, questioned this concept of perfect or global rationality, suggesting a different vision, based on empirical evidence and regarding an individual’s choices. He challenged the neoclassical theory of global rationality, suggesting his notion of bounded rationality, a satisficing (instead of optimizing) behavior, and the relevance of procedural rationality to understand the process of thought of decision makers.Thus, this paper focuses on Simon’s notion of bounded rationality, since bounded rationality remains the hallmark of his theoretical contribution. First, the paper examines the economic decision process in the neoclassical theory and Simon’s notion of bounded rationality. Then, it analyzes in depth Simon’s behavioral model of rational choice, underlining the relevance of satisficing behavior and procedural rationality. Finally, it suggests an assessment of the concept of bounded rationality.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it