Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes causal economic machine learning (CEML) as a research agenda that utilizes causal machine learning (CML) built on causal economics (CE) decision theory. Causal economics is better suited for use in machine learning optimization than expected utility theory (EUT) and behavioral economics (BE) based on its central feature of causal coupling (CC), which models decisions as requiring upfront costs, some certain and some uncertain, in anticipation of future, uncertain causally-linked benefits. This multi-period, causal-linked process incorporating certainty and uncertainty replaces the single period lottery outcomes augmented with intertemporal discounting used in EUT and BE, providing a more realistic framework for AI machine learning modelling and real world application. It is mathematically demonstrated that EUT and BE are constrained versions of CE. Causal coupling can also be applied at the macroeconomic level to gauge the effectiveness of policies that deliver various levels of cost and benefit coupling for individuals. With the growing interest in natural experiments in statistics and CML across many fields, such as healthcare, economics and business, there is a large potential opportunity to run AI models on CE foundations and compare results to models based on traditional decision making models that focus only on rationality, bounded to various degrees.
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 | 0.008 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".