A multinomial probit model with Choquet integral and attribute cut-offs
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
Several non-linear functions and machine learning methods have been developed for flexible specification of the systematic utility in discrete choice models. However, they lack interpretability, do not ensure monotonicity conditions, and restrict substitution patterns. We address the first two challenges by modeling the systematic utility using the Choquet Integral (CI) function and the last one by embedding CI into the multinomial probit (MNP) choice probability kernel. We also extend the MNP-CI model to account for attribute cut-offs that enable a modeler to approximately mimic the semi-compensatory behavior using the traditional choice experiment data. The MNP-CI model is estimated using a constrained maximum likelihood approach, and its statistical properties are validated through a comprehensive Monte Carlo study. The CI-based choice model is empirically advantageous as it captures interaction effects while maintaining monotonicity. It also provides information on the complementarity between pairs of attributes coupled with their importance ranking as a by-product of the estimation. These insights could potentially assist policymakers in making policies to improve the preference level for an alternative. These advantages of the MNP-CI model with attribute cut-offs are illustrated in an empirical application to understand New Yorkers’ preferences towards mobility-on-demand services.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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