MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317676827 · doi:10.1002/jae.3061

Estimating separable matching models

2024· article· en· W4317676827 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alfred Galichon, Bernard Salanié

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Econometrics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGame Theory and Voting Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork University
KeywordsMatching (statistics)EstimatorSeparable spaceSimple (philosophy)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceEntropy (arrow of time)MathematicsEconometricsApplied mathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Most recent empirical applications of matching with transferable utility have imposed a natural restriction: that the joint surplus be separable in the sources of unobserved heterogeneity. We propose here two simple methods to estimate models in this class. The first method is a minimum distance estimator that relies on the generalized entropy of matching. The second applies to the more special but popular Choo and Siow model, which reformulates as a generalized linear model with two‐way fixed effects. Neither method requires solving for the stable matching. Both methods are easy to apply and perform very well.

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)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score0.823

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied EconometricsSame topicGame Theory and Voting SystemsFrench-language works237,207