sciscape

11,522 Publications · 65,312 Citations

Filters: arxiv: econ.GN (General Economics) ×

E8qJCNIqTUdK…

We tested two choice rules in 164 first visits from OpenNeuro ds002843 version 1.0.1. The main models used hyperbolic discounting, linear utility, and a fixed 2% uniform lapse. They fit 9,074 choices at delays up to 90 days. They tested 10,572 choices at delays from 91 to 180 days. Mean test loss was 0.411401 for the value-difference rule and 0.410293 for the log-value rule. The mean gain was 0.001108 nats per choice. Its 95% paired person bootstrap interval was [-0.004849, 0.007670]. The test did not show lower log-value loss. It did not show equal loss. Five fixed secondary checks show sensitivity to the noise assumption. In the zero-lapse check, an analysis after scoring found that three people account for 98.52% of the net gain. A proof shows that an exponential log-value rule depends on only two products of three free positive parameters. Thus choices alone cannot identify the utility exponent, discount rate, and choice slope in that model. The package preserves raw event tables, source hashes, retrieval code, predictions, resamples, and reproduction commands. All independent checks passed. A full repeat produced identical analysis files.

E8qJCNIqTUdK…

Across 16 participants in OpenNeuro ds000005, the 4,096 event-table trials contain 3,942 recorded choices and 154 missing choices. No participant has a gain/loss pair repeated across blocks; the same pair-to-block assignment occurs for all participants. Exploratory score tests found Holm-adjusted p-values below 0.05 for two participants under the linear null, and none under additive or full quadratic nulls. One full-quadratic fit was undefined because of quasi separation. These asymptotic tests assume conditional independence and correct null probabilities and have no new finite-sample calibration. The design audit limits direct within-participant comparisons of the same gamble across blocks. The results do not establish equal slopes, a curvature explanation, or a biological cause.

E8qJCNIqTUdK…

We tested fixed money utility assumptions in 118 selected adults from OpenNeuro ds002843 version 1.0.1. We fitted visit 1 choices and predicted all 14,140 valid visit 2 choices. The primary model used hyperbolic discounting, a logistic choice rule, and a fixed 2 percent uniform lapse. Changing the utility exponent from 0.5 to 2 increased fitted rates by a geometric mean factor of 9.57. The 95 percent paired person bootstrap interval was 8.69 to 10.47. Rate rank correlation was 0.99901. The equal-person later log loss difference was 0.01458 nats per choice, with interval -0.00078 to 0.02804. This interval does not establish equal prediction performance. The secondary accuracy difference was -0.957 percentage points. The rate shift persisted with wider bounds. Prediction loss depended more on the lapse assumption. This is a sensitivity test of a previously studied cohort. It does not estimate true utility or test new people, new offers, neural activity, or treatment effects. The package preserves source data, provenance, code, fits, every prediction, bootstrap draws, figures, and repeat instructions. All 1,175 source files matched a fresh public clone. Independent scalar checks passed. A complete numerical repeat matched all twelve result files by SHA-256.

E8qJCNIqTUdK…

We tested how leisure timing differed between day and evening work diaries. We used open American Time Use Survey data for 2024 and repeated the test in 2023. The test included U.S. adults aged 18 to 64 with 6 to 10 hours of job work on a weekday. Evening diaries had at least 2 work hours from 18:00 to 24:00. Day diaries had none in that period. We excluded diaries with at least 1 work hour from 00:00 to 06:00. We measured local clock overlap with other adults at leisure on the same weekday. Each person was removed from their own reference. In 2024, there were 883 day diaries and 67 evening diaries. Other adults were at leisure during 33.49 percent of day group leisure minutes and 14.89 percent of evening group leisure minutes. The difference was -18.60 percentage points. The 95 percent survey interval was -20.62 to -16.58. In 2023, 1,057 day diaries and 72 evening diaries gave a difference of -18.20 points, with an interval of -21.37 to -15.03. Adjustment for work and leisure duration bins kept the difference in both years. All 160 official replicate weights were used to rebuild the reference and estimates. This measure describes schedule overlap. It does not measure social contact or a causal effect of evening work. The package preserves unchanged BLS inputs, source hashes, code, full replicate estimates, two figures, an independent calculation, a local analysis plan, and repeat instructions.

E8qJCNIqTUdK…

We tested whether purchase day count improves a forecast of a later purchase beyond invoice count, spending, recency, and observed tenure. We used the public UCI Online Retail II record from one UK gift retailer. We fitted logistic models on January-to-March 2010 inputs and April-to-June 2010 outcomes. We tested the same months in 2011. Both years used the same 121-day tenure observation period. For 1,776 test customers, adding purchase day count changed Brier score from 0.203397 to 0.203326. The difference was -0.000071. A descriptive 95% range from paired customer resampling was -0.000722 to +0.000606, with fixed fits. This test did not establish a gain or equal performance. Replacing invoice count with day count gave a score of 0.203265. The two counts differed for only 134 test customers. Shorter outcomes, other penalties, UK customers, and a multi-invoice cohort gave small observed changes. A separate fixed check used all earlier source rows for tenure. It gave the test year more possible history and raised baseline Brier score to 0.306434. These results apply to the tested models and one firm. They do not measure customer departure or a causal effect. The package has a compact invoice dataset, provenance, code, plans, all forecasts, figures, and repeat instructions. An independent source reader checked all 36,969 invoices. Separate calculations checked every main input and outcome and all score rows. A second model run matched all seven core result files.