MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W297316193

No Two Experiments are Identical

2014· preprint· en· W297316193 on OpenAlexaff
Larry G. Epstein, Yoram Halevy

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2014
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbiguityKnightian uncertaintyAmbiguity aversionEconometricsBall (mathematics)Relation (database)MathematicsPsychologyMathematical economicsSocial psychologyComputer sciencePhilosophyLinguisticsGeometry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study choice between bets on the colors of two balls, where one ball is drawn from each of two urns. Though you are told the same about each urn, you are told very little, so that you are not given any reason to be certain that the compositions are identical. We identify choices that reveal an aversion to ambiguity about the relation between urns, thus identifying a source of uncertainty different from the usual Knightian distinction between risk and ambiguity. Behavior is studied in a controlled high-stakes laboratory experiment, and the ability to rationalize the experimental findings is examined.

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 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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.293 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsFrench-language works237,207