MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200226115 · doi:10.1162/rest_a_01143

(Non-)Parametric Recoverability of Preferences and Choice Prediction

2021· article· en· W4200226115 on OpenAlexaff
Lanny Zrill

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Review of Economics and Statistics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParametric statisticsRestrictivenessSimple (philosophy)Parametric modelEconometricsMathematical economicsComputer scienceSemiparametric modelUpper and lower boundsEconomicsMathematical optimizationMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Simple functional forms for utility require restrictive structural assumptions that are often contrary to observed behavior. Even so, they are widely used in applied economic research. I address this issue using a two-part adaptive experimental design to compare the predictions of a popular parametric model of decision making under risk to those of non-parametric bounds on indifference curves. Interpreting the latter as an approximate upper bound, I find the parametric model sacrifices very little in terms of predictive success. This suggests that, despite their restrictiveness, simple functional forms may nevertheless be useful representations of preferences over risky alternatives.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.148 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Review of Economics and StatisticsSame topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207