2026-08-18 | | Total: 18
When parallel trends fails for some treated cohorts but not others, the average treatment effect on the treated (ATT), an average over all of them, is exactly the target that becomes hard to recover. We propose changing the estimand rather than defending it. The credible-subpopulation local ATT (LATT) is the effect for the subpopulation of cohorts whose parallel trends is credible, and it is point-identified under parallel trends for the selected cohorts alone, a weaker requirement that can hold when the ATT's fails. It is estimated by reweighting standard group-time effects toward those cohorts, and paired with honest sensitivity bounds on the residual violation that a pre-trend screen cannot rule out. The method's advantage grows with how informative pre-trends are about post-treatment violations, as simulations confirm. In an application, a significantly positive pooled estimate of the shale boom's effect on local house prices proves to rest on cohorts already trending before onset, and the credible subpopulation reveals no effect.
Most digital job-search assistance encourages unemployed workers to broaden their search toward related occupations, targeting one important source of search inefficiency: insufficient occupational diversification. Our analysis suggests that the relevant margin of adjustment depends on the underlying search problem. Building on a detailed analysis of job seekers' beliefs and search behavior, we identify a large group of pessimistic workers for whom the main constraints are low search effort and low aspirations, rather than insufficient occupational diversification. This diagnosis points to an unexpected intervention: rather than encouraging these workers to search in new occupations, we encourage them to search more intensively and apply for better-paying jobs within the occupations they already consider. We evaluate this diagnosis-based intervention, alongside a standard occupational recommendation, in a large-scale randomized experiment conducted with the French Public Employment Service. The motivational intervention increases search effort, raises reservation wages, and improves reemployment outcomes along the predicted margins. Occupational recommendations, by contrast, primarily benefit workers whose search problem lies in the allocation of attention across occupations and operate by activating existing perceptions rather than correcting beliefs. More broadly, our findings show how digital platforms can combine subjective expectations, behavioral data, targeted interventions, and randomized experimentation to diagnose job seekers' needs and iteratively improve intervention design.
Job seekers' expectations about reemployment are increasingly used to study job search, but what their biases reveal about underlying beliefs and preferences is ambiguous. We combine new survey data, structural modeling, and machine learning to uncover the informational content of these expectations and show how they can be used to improve the targeting of employment support. Using a new panel of French job seekers' subjective expectations linked to administrative records, we show that reemployment expectation biases are strongly associated with, and summarize, biases in beliefs about the two fundamentals of search, job offer arrival rates and the wage distribution. These underlying biases are heterogeneous but strongly positively correlated, so their effects on search compound. We then estimate a structural job search model with multiple sources of biased beliefs and show that correcting them helps pessimistic job seekers but can demotivate and hurt optimistic ones, providing a rationale for targeting. Finally, we develop a machine-learning stratification that recovers policy-relevant groups, with distinct patterns of biased beliefs and behaviors, from easily elicited reemployment expectations alone. This gives employment services a simple tool to target informational interventions.
This paper analyzes when choice probabilities reveal rankings of deterministic utility indices in semiparametric discrete choice models. It begins with binary choice, where quantile thresholds guarantee ranking recovery, and shows that such thresholds can arise either from behavioral departures from utility maximization (e.g., limited attention) under exchangeable unobservables, or from non-exchangeable unobservables under standard utility maximization. These behavioral and distributional routes are then extended to multinomial choice. Under limited attention, balance restrictions on attention probabilities yield global linear ranking partitions which are robust to the distribution of unobservables and, given sufficiently rich joint variation in the differences of utility indices, are also necessary. Absent the required attention restrictions, opposite rankings can produce overlapping probability images. Under non-exchangeable unobservables, a comparable distribution-uniform partition generally need not exist. Holding the distribution fixed, however, ranking recovery remains possible via an injective nonlinear map from normalized utility differences to choice probabilities under both behavioral and distributional extensions. Together, the results distinguish distribution-robust global ranking partitions from ranking recovery with a fixed distribution of unobservables and clarify the limits of extending binary quantile restrictions to multinomial choice.
This paper studies how robust social learning is when sampling is selective, i.e., some types of actions are more likely to be sampled by successors. We show that Bayesian agents can achieve asymptotic learning despite non-expanding observations, because the endogenous observation network itself carries information and agents have ways to undo the selection bias.
Empirical studies of peer effects often exploit conditional random assignment to peer groups within urns. We develop a GMM framework for estimation and inference in this setting. The framework separately identifies endogenous and contextual peer effects and nests tests of random peer-group assignment as a special case. It permits unknown heteroskedasticity and corrects finite-urn bias in variance estimation. Its asymptotic theory allows the number of peer groups to grow through more urns, more groups within urns, or both. We establish the asymptotic validity of the procedures and evaluate their finite-sample performance through Monte Carlo simulations. We apply the method to study peer effects on personality among university students. For traits with positive reduced-form peer effects, the estimates indicate that positive contextual effects are partly offset by negative endogenous effects.
We ask whether COVID-19 lockdown stringency altered national Olympic performance between Rio 2016 and Tokyo 2020, using the Oxford Stringency Index and the 99 countries that won a medal in either edition. As in \citet{liu2024}, mean performance is unaffected: stringency is insignificant in every OLS and ANOVA specification. The distribution is not. Among the 84 non-traditionally dominant nations, medal changes are three to six times more dispersed in high-stringency countries; the difference is absent among dominant nations and concentrated in men's events. A common shock left the competitive hierarchy intact while sharply raising outcome uncertainty for smaller Olympic teams.
We study the existence of a \emph{Regional Differential} in rugby sevens: whether, in tournaments where no competing team enjoys formal home status, some national sides systematically over- or under-perform depending on \emph{where} the event is staged. Using the universe of 2672 men's and women's matches from international rugby sevens tournaments played between 2016 and 2025, principally the World Rugby Sevens Series, but also the World Cup Sevens and the Olympic Games, we replace the binary ``locality'' indicator of the classic home advantage literature with continuous measures of geographic, temporal, and cultural proximity between each team and the host country. We show that aggregate associations between proximity and performance (which appear large and highly significant in naive specifications) are almost entirely an artifact of \emph{team composition} and \emph{scheduling}: once team and opponent quality are absorbed through fixed effects in a symmetric team-match panel, no general regional advantage survives. However, this null aggregate masks substantial heterogeneity. For a well-defined subset of teams (most notably France, but also New Zealand, the United States, Canada, Spain, Ireland, Kenya, Samoa, and Brazil), performance declines significantly and monotonically with the distance separating the host city from home. Some of the established southern-hemisphere powers (Fiji, South Africa, Australia, Argentina) are essentially distance-neutral. We further show that for some teams the gradient operates through east-west jet lag rather than pure displacement. The Regional Differential in sevens is therefore real but \emph{team-specific} rather than universal, a distinction obscured by pooled estimation.
Research activity generates highly localized positive spillovers, yet in the U.S. it has become increasingly spatially misaligned with population and economic activity as people moved away from legacy cities where major research institutions remain anchored. Reallocating researchers toward population centers could broaden local access to knowledge but may reduce knowledge production if legacy institutions or large research clusters raise researcher output. The spatial reallocation of researchers therefore entails a trade-off between gains in knowledge access and losses in knowledge production. To quantify the knowledge production loss from reallocation, we use bibliographic data to separate individual effects from location effects and show that location effects account for substantial differences in research output across locations. Our instrumental-variables estimates provide robust evidence of own-institution agglomeration effects but weaker evidence of external-cluster effects. We then incorporate these estimates into counterfactual reallocations and show that marginally reallocating researchers toward large metropolitan areas with relatively little research activity can plausibly raise aggregate output because the associated knowledge production losses are modest and can be offset by small access gains.
We design a method for measuring the risk preferences of agents in the deep past. The method combines a structural model of crop choice as a portfolio allocation with machine-learning prediction of expected crop returns, using historic agronomic and climate data. We estimate county-level risk preferences for the United States and farmer-level preferences in Kansas from 1889 to 1929. More risk averse farmers leveraged less, were less likely to purchase novel WWI Liberty Bonds, and were more likely to participate in local risk-sharing institutions. We show that higher risk aversion predicts slower tractor adoption and farm mechanization during the 1920s.
Route and activity choice are connected levels of a common sequential mobility decision problem: activity choice determines what people do, where, and when, while route choice governs how they move between activities. This review develops a unified framework connecting transportation choice modeling with inverse reinforcement learning (IRL) and imitation learning (IL). Under explicit assumptions, recursive logit, logit dynamic discrete choice, and maximum-entropy IRL share a soft Bellman representation, while trajectory occupancies and network flows satisfy related conservation laws. However, utility, reward, policy, occupancy, constraints, and observation errors remain different estimands with different behavioral and counterfactual interpretations. We review constrained and inverse-constrained learning, occupancy-ratio and DICE methods, incomplete and mixed-quality demonstrations, graph and sequence learning, transfer, data fusion, multi-agent choice, and large language models. Our central message is that machine learning adds the greatest value when embedded within a behaviorally disciplined framework: exact transitions enforce feasibility, structured rewards preserve interpretable trade-offs, observation models address heterogeneous data sources, and network or equilibrium solvers produce coherent system outcomes. Such hybrid models can improve scalability and prediction without sacrificing behavioral identification or policy relevance.
We propose a family of control variate estimators for variance reduction in design-based survey sampling and causal inference, with and without interference. In these settings, inverse probability weighting (IPW) estimators are widely used, but may have large variance when sampling, treatment, or exposure probabilities are small. Building on the observation that several common estimators, including the Hajek, normalized, and augmented inverse probability weighting (AIPW) estimators, correct the Horvitz-Thompson estimator by canceling part of its randomness, we provide a unified interpretation of these estimators as special cases of a general control variate estimator. We then construct optimal control variates that can further reduce the finite sample variance compared to these common estimators. We parameterize the proposed control variates by their bases and characterize the optimal bases through a stochastic optimization formulation. In survey sampling and causal inference without interference, the optimal bases are characterized by leading eigenvectors of matrices that depend on both the design-based sampling structure and the model-based outcome uncertainty. In causal inference under network interference, the optimal bases solve a nonconvex quadratic optimization problem; we provide a $\frac{1}{2}$-approximate solution and an alternating local search heuristic. We apply the control variate estimators to the Swiss Environmental Panel survey data and the Chinese social network data, and conduct extensive simulations to show that the proposed control variate estimators can achieve substantial variance reduction.
Neurofinance shows that financial valuation depends on evolving neural states, while temporal experience is itself state dependent. Yet intertemporal models typically treat time as exogenous and ask how delay affects valuation. This paper examines the converse question: can valuation-related neural dynamics generate subjective financial time? We develop a continuous-time model on a joint financial--neuro-evaluative state space in which subjective financial time is accumulated valuation along dynamically admissible histories. We characterise realised temporal-rate dispersion and show that, under matched financial dynamics, distinct neuro-evaluative trajectories can generate different subjective financial times. Financial equivalence therefore need not imply temporal equivalence. Valuation curvature further determines local path dependence. A proof-of-concept behavioural--fMRI analysis uses \(1{,}183\) observations, \(1{,}126\) valuation transitions, and \(798\) financially matched pairs. Using a medial-prefrontal valuation-state coordinate based on vmPFC and dmPFC responses, the strongest participant exhibits a positive association between neural-state separation and subsequent valuation divergence (\(ρ=0.253,\ p_{\mathrm{perm}}=0.001\)), robust to residual financial distance (\(ρ=0.251\)) and tighter matching (\(ρ=0.207\)). Participant effects are heterogeneous, although combined evidence gives \(p=0.0216\). The data support the neural state-separation premise rather than directly identifying subjective financial time. The framework establishes a theoretical and empirically grounded basis for endogenous subjective time in neurofinance. \keywords{Neurofinance $\cdot$ Subjective financial time $\cdot$ Neural valuation $\cdot$ Relative subjective value $\cdot$ Intertemporal choice $\cdot$ Temporal dispersion $\cdot$ Path dependence
Economics journals ration access to peer review with time and money. A July 2026 census of 500 RePEc-ranked economics journals accepting unsolicited submissions finds that 113 (22.6 per cent) charge a fee, with incidence falling from 68 per cent in the top 50 to 2 per cent in the bottom 50. A sequential-submission model shows that waiting pays part of the capacity-clearing price, leaving the fee as a residual. Because rejected manuscripts move down the ranking, a fee reduces system-wide referee demand only when authors stop, shorten their submission chains or switch to journals requiring fewer reports.
This article surveys emerging directions in the mathematics of democracy. It uses three case studies --- voting theory, participatory budgeting, and deliberative democracy --- to highlight how contemporary challenges motivate rigorous mathematical research that incorporates real-world data, institutional constraints, and implementation feasibility. Within each case, we highlight active and promising research frontiers, evidence of real-world impact, practical applications, and opportunities for getting involved.
Motivated by modern marketplaces, where the platform or the seller routinely gathers detailed user profiles, we study a novel learning theoretic model that simultaneously involves information and mechanism design. Specifically, we consider the economic setting recently introduced by Bergemann et al. (2022), where in addition to the menu of quality-price pairs, the seller offers information on the value of the match between product quality and buyer's taste via a signaling scheme. We relax the assumption that the seller knows the buyers' belief about the distribution of tastes and study the sample requirements of designing a revenue maximizing scheme. We consider both the batch setting where we have access to data from a set of i.i.d. buyers and an online demand query model where we observe the buyers' behaviors to seller's schemes. Despite the apparent non-convexity of the problem, we also give the first FPTAS to compute a scheme that maximizes the revenue within an arbitrarily small additive loss, which was left open by Bergemann et al. (2022). Overall, this brings a new learning perspective in asymmetric economic settings where buyers and sellers know different types of information.
We study how many observations are needed to determine the causal direction between two linearly related variables. Classical LiNGAM theory shows that independent non-Gaussian disturbances identify the direction, but does not quantify the difficulty when the causal effect is weak or the disturbances are nearly Gaussian. Let $β$ bound the absolute structural coefficient from below, let $ν$ measure each standardized disturbance's distance from Gaussianity, and let the disturbance scales lie in $[\underlineσ,\overlineσ]$. We prove the sharp local minimax law \[ N_2^\star(β,ν,δ) \asymp \frac{\log(1/δ)} {d_β^2+β^2ν^2}, \qquad d_β= \left[β^2- \left(1-\frac{\underlineσ^2}{\overlineσ^2}\right)\right]_+. \] Previous theory established population identifiability or assumed a fixed separation between the two directions. By contrast, we establish the sharp sample complexity as a joint function of edge strength, distance from Gaussianity, and scale uncertainty, and characterize when identification comes from non-Gaussian dependence or from covariance alone. The proof was independently generated with GPT-5.6 Sol in Codex's Ultra mode during a two-hour session. The human author supplied the prompt and was responsible only forchecking the proof and revising and polishing the manuscript.
In Shapley-Scarf housing markets, Ma (1994) shows that top trading cycles (TTC) is the unique mechanism satisfying individual rationality (IR), Pareto efficiency (PE), and strategy-proofness. We ask what other mechanisms become possible when strategy-proofness is replaced by a weaker condition called non-obvious manipulability (NOM), introduced by Troyan and Morrill (2020). We first show that this weaker condition does not help on its own: every IR and PE mechanism is already NOM. We therefore introduce a new condition: NOM with groups, under which each agent knows the preferences of the other members of her group, but not those of agents outside the group. This condition reduces to strategy-proofness when all agents belong to one group, and to standard NOM when every group is a singleton. Also, we introduce a participation condition called group rationality (GR), which requires that no group do worse than it would by trading only among its own members. We then define a class of mechanisms called TTC with super-groups, whose members satisfy GR, PE, and NOM with groups. The class includes mechanisms that differ from standard TTC, including mechanisms that are not strategy-proof. Furthermore, we show that every mechanism that satisfies GR, PE, and NOM with groups has the same best- and worst-case outcomes as every TTC with super-groups mechanism.