MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121185054

Contracting with Private Rewards

2015· preprint· en· W3121185054 on OpenAlexafffund
René Kirkegaard

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaQueen's UniversityCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsIncentiveMoral hazardMicroeconomicsPrincipal (computer security)Order (exchange)Work (physics)Contractible spaceEconomicsPrincipal–agent problemBalance (ability)Private information retrievalIncomplete contractsEmployment contractBusinessPublic economicsPsychologyComputer scienceFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I extend the canonical moral hazard model to allow the agent to face endogenous and non-contractible uncertainty. The agent works for the principal and simultaneously pursues private rewards. I establish conditions under which the first-order approach remains valid. The model adds to the literature on intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation. Specifically, to induce higher effort at work the contract may offer higher rewards but flatter incentives. The contract change makes the agent reevaluate his “work-life balance†. Larger employment rewards lessens the incentive to pursue private rewards. The greater reliance on labor income then necessitates weaker explicit incentives to induce high effort.

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)0.004
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicExperimental Behavioral Economics StudiesFrench-language works237,207