MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387497916 · doi:10.1016/j.jmateco.2023.102909

A dual approach to agency problems

2023· article· en· W4387497916 on OpenAlex

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

VenueJournal of Mathematical Economics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicLaw, Economics, and Judicial Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDual (grammatical number)Mathematical optimizationConstraint (computer-aided design)UniquenessPrincipal–agent problemConvex optimizationRegular polygonSimple (philosophy)Agency (philosophy)Computer scienceMathematical economicsMathematicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a dual approach to the standard model of moral hazard. We formulate the dual of the principal–agent problem under the assumption that the incentive constraint can be replaced by a local constraint (the first-order approach), to examine whether the relaxed agency problem yields a candidate solution. The dual formulation generates a convex conjugate, which transforms the agent’s utility from compensation into a dual functional. The dual problem features a simple convex structure, which enables us to perform a comprehensive analysis for the agency problem. We derive novel and more tractable conditions for existence and uniqueness of a solution to the problem with the dual elements. Furthermore, the approach to the dual problem provides illuminating insights into the previous nonexistence results.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.293
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.005

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.168 · 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