MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414973027 · doi:10.1111/jpet.70069

Merger Review Under Asymmetric Information

2025· article· en· W4414973027 on OpenAlexaff
Corinne Langinier, Amrita RayChaudhuri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Economic Theory · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMerger and Competition Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImperfectInformation asymmetryPerfect informationImperfect competitionType I and type II errorsType (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT When the antitrust authority has imperfect information about firms' costs, we show that all firms (including firms not participating in a merger) can influence the antitrust authority's merger decision by manipulating Pre‐merger quantities. We find that there exists a clear relationship between the level of synergy generated by a given merger and the type of error in the merger decision that is more likely to occur. The larger the level of merger‐induced synergy, the greater the likelihood of a Type II error whereby a consumer surplus‐decreasing merger is allowed. The smaller the level of synergy, the greater the likelihood of a Type I error whereby a consumer surplus‐increasing merger is rejected.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.217 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Public Economic TheorySame topicMerger and Competition AnalysisFrench-language works237,207