Bibliographic record
Abstract
Consider a manufacturer who has produced and sold a single product through a retail channel and now considers whether to open a direct channel to sell a product directly to customers. Upon deciding to encroach the market, the manufacturer needs to determine whether to offer the same product as available in the retail market (i.e. homogenized encroachment) or to offer a variant that has a better quality (i.e. differentiated encroachment). The interactions between the manufacturer and the retailer are modeled as the Stackelberg game models in which the manufacturer and the retailer act as the leader and follower, respectively. We show that when the product in the direct channel is slightly superior to that in the retail channel, differentiated encroachment can lead to greater manufacturer profit than either no encroachment or homogenized encroachment. On the contrary, when the product in the direct channel is sufficiently superior to that in the retail channel, the manufacturer is best to adopt either homogenized or differentiated encroachment strategy. Moreover, differentiated encroachment is not the retailer’s best choice in most cases. Finally, we find that from the view of social welfare, either differentiated or homogenized encroachment dominates no encroachment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".