MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2956451280 · doi:10.1111/joie.12284

Pricing Patterns in Wholesale Electricity Markets: Unilateral Market Power or Coordinated Behavior?*

2022· article· en· W2956451280 on OpenAlex
David P. Brown, Andrew Eckert

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Industrial Economics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAuction Theory and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectricityProfit maximizationBusinessMarket powerMicroeconomicsIndustrial organizationProfit (economics)Electricity marketElectricity pricingMaximizationElectricity retailingEconomicsMonopoly

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We examine allegations that firms in Alberta's electricity industry manipulated public information to coordinate in the wholesale market. We investigate whether bids by firms who employed unique pricing patterns were consistent with unilateral expected profit maximization. Our results suggest that these firms could have increased expected profits through unilateral deviations. For one firm, the potential to increase profits is greater on days when certain offer patterns are observed, providing support for the claim that such patterns may have assisted coordination on high‐priced outcomes. These results suggest that regulators should exercise caution when designing information disclosure policies in concentrated electricity markets.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.640
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.238 · 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