MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205640165 · doi:10.1093/cje/beab056

Frank Ramsey’s place in the history of mathematical economics: not what you think

2021· article· en· W4205640165 on OpenAlex
Pedro Garcia Duarte, Cheryl Misak

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge Journal of Economics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Theory and Institutions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsSkepticismPositive economicsValue (mathematics)ReputationNeoclassical economicsSociologySocial scienceEpistemologyPhilosophyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Frank Ramsey is a towering figure in economics. His two papers published in the 1920s are responsible for his reputation as a pioneer in mathematical economics. Economists and historians of economics disagree on how to read Ramsey. One point of contention is whether he introduced the use of a representative agent or instead employed a social welfare function. We intend to clarify this question by further complicating it. It is clear from archival materials, including a previously undiscovered paper (‘Mathematical Economics’), that he was not a trailblazer in mathematical analyses of economic questions. Ramsey was a socialist who was inclined to theories of value and psychology that went beyond utility. He struggled with the tension between what is good for the individual and what is good for society. He was sure that utilitarian psychology was not an accurate basis for economics and he was sceptical of its idealizations.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score0.934

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.167 · 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