Screening Through Investment: Evidence from the Chinese Automobile Industry
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper proposes a competition theory to explain the role of automobile dealers’ investment in a vertical contract with manufacturers. Dealer contracts specify manufacturer-suggested retail prices and elements of dealer quality. Dealer quality investments require minimum financial capital where manufacturers impose these limits on dealers. The required dealer investment screens for qualified dealers and incentivizes the desired dealer quality. The prediction is that promotional services, prices, and gross returns are greater for high-quality brands than that for standard-quality brands. To test the theory, we collected data on auto dealers in China in June 2015 for an empirical analysis. Our findings support these predictions: Dealer investment (registered capital) is positively correlated with brand average product prices. In addition, the registered capital is higher when the aggregate demand is greater since high demand increases returns, which induces dealers to increase their investment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it