Papers

Employers in Germany argue that collective agreements restrict their flexibility concerning working hours. Using data from the IAB Establishment Panel for the years 2008 to 2024, we investigate working-time adjustments after exit from collective bargaining. We find that exit is associated with only a modest increase in weekly working hours of around 0.3 to 0.6 per cent using fixed-effects and event-study models, corresponding to eight to thirteen additional minutes per week. This adjustment occurs shortly after leaving collective bargaining coverage. We further find no evidence that other margins of working-time adjustment, such as Saturday or Sunday work, are used more extensively after exit. In contrast to previous survey evidence, our findings call into question that working-hours constraints are one of the main drivers of exit from collective bargaining coverage.

Expectiles are the only law-invariant risk measures that are both coherent and elicitable. Unlike Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR), however, they do not admit a Rockafellar–Uryasev representation that admits tractable Wasserstein reformulations. We address this difficulty by developing an envelope theorem for worst-case expectiles that characterizes the worst-case expectile over a Wasserstein ambiguity set as the unique root of a worst-case expectation with a two-piece affine integrand. This representation permits direct application of standard Wasserstein duality. Using this result, we reformulate a multi-period tri-level mean–expectile portfolio problem as four parametric linear programs with constraints. We establish four structural properties of the proposed model: an endogenously damped price of robustness, a decision-dependent critical radius beyond which the expectile tail component becomes inactive, exact recovery of the nominal model at zero ambiguity, and a characterization of how the Wasserstein ground metric determines whether the limiting portfolio becomes more concentrated or more diversified. Numerical experiments on 90 FTSE constituents over 3,341 out-of-sample trading days show that the expectile model outperforms a CVaR model matched on ambiguity set, radius, ground metric, and trade-off weight in all nine parameter cells—significantly so whenever the radius is non-trivial. The experiments further confirm the predicted degeneracy under the ground metric.

We represent (weighted-)selection-elliptical distributions as an affine combination of the $q$ selection variables plus an elliptical term whose direction alone is independent. This form suffices for $q+2$ fund separation via first-order stochastic dominance, inter alia relaxing Simaan's (1993) three-fund assumptions.

Structural price diffusivity explains many empirical regularities of market impact including the “square-root law” and its crossover to a linear regime for low trading rates \citep{bonart2026diffusive}. One of its central predictions is that an information-neutral trading strategy generates a diffusive impact state. We microfound this result in an economy with a trader and many arbitrageurs who progressively eliminate predictable returns. Each arbitrageur observes realized returns and a private signal of one component of the fundamental return. As aggregate private information becomes complete and under suitable convergence to a stationary limit, the trader's impact law is of the form $j=U\cdot w$, where $w$ is the innovation in the trading schedule and $U$ is causal all-pass. Impact returns are therefore white, even though no individual arbitrageur can reconstruct the underlying trading strategy. We then investigate the economic meaning of the impact phase. We argue that the $U$ which has minimum distance from the filter $L$ generating the trade flow is an especially interesting candidate: Trade flow is then minimally distorted under impact and arbitrage, and it always guarantees positive impact costs. Under a trader flow generated by a biexponential $L$ (the simplest form allowed in our model) an interesting result emerges: Impact decline is confined to a narrow band of $50\%$–$60\%$, lower than some empirical estimates and quite consistent with others. More complicated flow models can lead to different decays. Finally, we argue that in real markets, the impact phase is probably somewhat “distorted” in its long-term tails which allows for a full relaxation of the impact propagator. The effect is weak, long-term mean-reversion of the impact state.

Evidence that pricing algorithms collude comes from markets in which every seller runs the same algorithm. We ask what happens when they do not. Four language models from four providers, each at its cheapest tier, price in a four-firm logit Bertrand market without communication, in every homogeneous, two-by-two and fully mixed composi- tion (11 cells, 20 runs, 200 periods). Collusion is a property of the model: Claude and Gemini markets reach 72 to 79 percent of the monopoly rent, DeepSeek markets 24 percent, and GPT markets none, though GPT prices drift above the monopoly level rather than toward competition. Mixing does not reduce collusion by itself. Markets containing Gemini, which opens at the highest price and settles highest, are more col- lusive than the homogeneous markets they are built from; markets containing Claude, which opens lower and follows its rivals down, are less so; and only the fully mixed market is significantly less collusive than the average homogeneous one. Stability de- pends on the least stable participant: two GPT firms suffice to keep any market from converging. Inside mixed markets the rent is shared in a transitive order, DeepSeek over Claude over Gemini over GPT, that inverts the anchor ranking. The model that raises the price collects the least of the rent, as the price-leadership model predicts.

Can a regulator promise both a risk ceiling and a development deadline when safety productivity is unknown? A ceiling below the final model's unprotected hazard requires a minimum stock of safety knowledge, so both promises hold only if weak research can be ruled out. Learning first and then replaying development, with spare compute in safety, comes close to that minimum. In a calibration with only state risk, constant safety yield, and full knowledge transfer, it needs only 3.3 percent more productivity than the necessary bound. Customer services pay for the guarantee. Rules that fix compute allocation fix dates, not risk.

Forecasting resale prices of used electronics is critical for subscription-based platforms where pricing errors translate directly into risk. Unlike structured financial markets, second-hand electronics exhibit high volatility, sparse listing histories, and non-normal price dynamics - yet no systematic time-series benchmark exists for this domain. This paper presents the first multi-horizon benchmark of statistical and deep learning forecasting models for used electronics price prediction. We use a large-scale dataset of daily price listings from Polish online marketplaces (January 2022 to March 2025, 100+ smartphone and laptop models) and evaluate eleven models across six horizons from 1 to 365 days, covering classical methods (ARIMA, ETS, Theta), recurrent and convolutional networks (LSTM, TCN), and modern deep architectures (N-BEATS, N-HiTS, TFT, PatchTST, Informer). Three complementary evaluation protocols assess trajectory fitness, one-shot endpoint accuracy, and cross-horizon transfer. N-BEATS achieves the lowest MAPE beyond 30 days, reaching 8.51% at 365 days versus 14.94% for the best statistical baseline - a 43% reduction. At short horizons (1-7 days), all models converge near 0.72% MAPE and the naive baseline remains competitive. A single N-BEATS model trained at 365 days generalizes to all shorter horizons, eliminating the need for horizon-specific models. N-BEATS and N-HiTS also demonstrate superior hyperparameter stability.

We study differences in economic outcomes by perceived skin tone among African Americans using full-count U.S. decennial census data from the late-19th and early-20th centuries. Comparing children coded as "Black" or "Mulatto" by census enumerators and linking these children across population censuses, we first document large gaps in educational attainment and income among African Americans with darker and lighter perceived skin tones. To disentangle the drivers of these gaps, we identify all 35,992 families in which enumerators assigned same-gender siblings different Black/Mulatto classifications. Relative to sisters coded as Mulatto, sisters coded as Black had lower educational attainment, were less likely to marry, and had less-educated, likely lower-earning husbands. These patterns are consistent with more severe contemporaneous discrimination against African American women with darker perceived skin tones. In contrast, we find similar educational attainment, marital outcomes, and incomes among differently-classified brothers. Men perceived as African Americans of any skin tone faced similar contemporaneous discrimination, consistent with the "one-drop" racial classification rule that grouped together individuals with any known Black ancestry. Lower incomes for African American men perceived as having darker skin tone in the general population were driven by differences in opportunities and resources that varied across families, likely reflecting the impacts of historical or family-level discrimination.

We provide an event-level Hawkes microfoundation for a multitype inverse-Gaussian stochastic clock. We show that the event counts and integrated intensities of nearly critical multivariate linear Hawkes processes converge jointly to a multivariate pure-jump subordinator when reproduction delays have finite mean and immigration is balanced so that rare large families remain visible. The dependence among the limiting coordinates is inherited from microscopic cross-excitation, and the limit admits a Brownian additive-field first-passage representation. We call this process the multitype inverse-Gaussian subordinator. Its diagonal case consists of independent classical inverse-Gaussian subordinators, with the univariate model as a further special case. The square-root specialization recovers the inverse-Gaussian clock obtained at the boundary of hyper-rough square-root models by Abi Jaber–Attal–Rosenbaum (Ann. Appl. Probab. 36(4): 3635–3660, 2026). Our cluster proof exposes the underlying mechanism: finite-variance near-critical branching creates rare but macroscopic families, while their internal timing disappears on the observation scale, so each family becomes a jump. We also clarify the relation with the multivariate Hawkes scaling theory of Xu (arXiv:2412.14459): its diagonal-atom condition yields the diagonal specialization, whereas the genuinely coupled limit requires a separate uniqueness argument. In addition, under a common tilted-stability condition, we replace the high-intensity assumption in that theory by a weaker accumulated-activity condition and provide the Riccati identification needed when the potential has an atom. We strengthen convergence of the count and compensator and extend the scalar conclusion to finite-variance age-dependent branching clusters.

Many of the questions now put to large language models have no correct answer to score against: what a policy is worth, which option a user should choose, how to weigh competing values. Stated-preference economics has faced this problem for decades. It judges survey responses without knowing the true value, through a framework of validity and related concepts: content, construct, and criterion validity, reliability, incentive compatibility, and consequentiality. We argue that this framework is a general method for evaluating language models, and we set out what each concept means for LLM evaluation. We demonstrate the approach using a published water-quality stated preference economic valuation survey (Vossler et al. 2023) administered to six models. In this economic application, the validity tests take the form of predictions from economic theory: demand should slope down, and willingness to pay should respond to the scope of the good and to income. The tests separate the models sharply. Two older models fail the most basic test at a household income level of \$75,000, and the two newest pass every test of theoretical validity we can score, but diverge on convergent validity. Passing validity tests shows that a model's answers are coherent, not that they are correct.

We introduce a mean-reverting stochastic differential equation with a three-component stochastic term and show that it generates a hierarchy of steady-state (stationary) distributions. At the top level, the hierarchy is described by a modified-Beta distribution, while one- and two-parameter reductions produce compact-support, power-law-tailed, and exponential-type limiting families within a single stochastic framework. We then construct two generalized extensions of this hierarchy. In the first, the power transformation is applied directly at the level of the stochastic differential equation; in the second, the same transformation is applied only after the stationary modified-Beta hierarchy has been obtained. While these two procedures agree on important lower branches and limiting cases they generally differ at the top level. The generalized hierarchy is therefore not unique: nonlinear transformation and stationary-state reduction do not commute. For both routes, we derive the probability density and cumulative distribution functions, express their parameters in terms of the underlying stochastic dynamics, clarify the relations among their limiting cases, and compare the resulting families with the traditional Generalized Beta framework.

As option markets grow and AI advances, agentic systems for option trading are gaining increasing attention. Language-model-based agents can reason over contextual information such as news, but option trading presents a particularly challenging decision problem: a single stock can have thousands of contracts, and the agent must decide both which contracts to trade and how to combine them. Existing approaches often sidestep this complexity by restricting the policy to a fixed strategy structure, such as a straddle, limiting their ability to switch strategies as market conditions change. We present SOTA (Stock Options Trading Agents), an agentic trading framework for structured option-strategy selection. SOTA abstracts the large option universe into strategy-level decisions while deterministic resolvers handle portfolio implementation. We develop SOTA by post-training Qwen3.8-27B with supervised fine-tuning followed by reinforcement learning. SOTA is evaluated on options on nine large-cap U.S. equities and SPY against rule-based and machine-learning strategy selectors in the same trading environment. Over a six-month out-of-sample period, SOTA earns an 18.3% total return with a Sharpe ratio of 1.60 and a maximum drawdown of 8.96%. We also document an asymmetric role of news: news improves frontier-teacher trajectories, but retaining news during reinforcement learning reduces out-of-sample return from 18.3% to -2.7%.

This paper extends Goodwin's (1967) predator-prey growth-cycle model to incorporate the negative impact of Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) on labor productivity. Using U.S. state-level data for 1998–2019, we first document that deteriorations in the labor share are followed by rising drug-induced mortality. We then build this link into the model through a novel discrete-choice mechanism in which the probability of OUD decreases with the wage share, so when real wages fail to keep pace with productivity growth, opioid use rises. This behavioral health channel feeds back into the economy through a productivity damage function. Applying the existence part of the Andronov-Hopf bifurcation theorem, we show that the resulting three-dimensional nonlinear system admits a limit cycle, as confirmed by our numerical simulations. Along the cycle, rising OUD paradoxically raises the employment rate, as falling productivity requires more labor per unit of output; across steady states, however, higher OUD prevalence is associated with a lower employment rate, consistent with evidence that opioid use disorder reduces labor force participation. Moreover, our numerical experiments show that OUD sensitivity to income widens fluctuations, while productivity sensitivity to OUD counterintuitively compresses them through a self-correcting feedback that speeds the recovery of the wage share. Policies that weaken the link between income and OUD, such as stronger social safety nets, stabilize the resulting dynamics.

Reality may establish that an outcome occurred without identifying which evolving procedure produced it or why. This distinction matters in production ML systems whose code, configuration, and artifacts change while external feedback accumulates. We examine it in a human-directed, agent-engineered quantitative trading system, using oracle to mean an external source of realized outcomes rather than a complete correctness specification. Across one year, the account gained and outperformed a broad market index, while annual alpha was not statistically distinguishable from zero under the main retrospective specification. Retrospectively selected subperiods include adverse relative performance and conditional candidate-level weakness under declared approximate references. Engineering records document changes during the episode, and complete recommendation-to-runtime binding is unavailable. The archive does not establish a common frozen instance or a unique cause. The case motivates an outcome–diagnosis gap: outcome evidence, evaluated-object identity, and causal explanation support distinct claims. We distinguish frozen instances, pre-specified adaptive procedures, and ad-hoc development; organize archive-relative claim identifiability and an evidence hierarchy; and propose a prospective production-binding protocol. An illustrative compatible-history example shows how factual binding can resolve a recommendation's referent without supplying its counterfactual effect. The protocol is proposed rather than prospectively validated. External feedback constrains outcome claims, while provenance and additional identification structure determine the resolution of diagnosis.

We introduce a class of demand models for market-level data. The models can be estimated by linear instrumental variables regression while accommodating substitution patterns far richer than the logit and nested logit models they embed. They are built from closed-form inverse market share functions through a generator analogous to McFadden's generalized extreme value generating function, but acting on market shares. Constructive results allow arbitrary nesting structures, including overlapping nests and partial membership, yielding inverse-share analogs of generalized extreme value models. The class is consistent with utility maximization and strictly larger than the class of regular additive random utility models.

The square-root impact law (SRIL), $I = Y\sigma\sqrt{Q/V}$, bundles two facts that a single mechanism must explain at once: a shape (impact proportional to square-root of traded volume $Q$) and an amplitude ($Y=O(1)$, independent of the participation rate $\varphi$). Bonart has recently proposed an elegant solution: if realized and counterfactual prices are both diffusive, information-neutral impact must have white increments and the SRIL follows without the wart. We reformulate and simplify his argument, and foreground the ingredient he himself regards as essential — that the market whitens the stationary stream of each participant's metaorders, not any isolated one. The Lillo–Mike–Farmer model satisfies his premises, yet gives an isolated metaorder the super-square-root impact $\varphi^{(1-\gamma)/2}Q^{(1+\gamma)/2}$, $\gamma\in(0,1)$, because single metaorders (i.e. not part of a stream) are statistically invisible and thus priced mechanically. We then construct an explicit multi-agent propagator that realizes Bonart's whitening, and show it reproduces the clean SRIL precisely when the market can attribute trades to their issuer. But correct re-attribution of anonymous trades is a formidable task, which requires markets to behave as implausibly efficient signal processing machines. The stream hypothesis makes a sharp, falsifiable prediction — isolated metaorders, well separated in time, should not obey the SRIL — that does not seem agree with empirical data known to us. Independently, a volume-conservation argument singles out the square-root law and lays bare the step the diffusivity route must assume: diffusivity fixes the variance of impact — an additive, stationary, age-blind quantity — whereas the SRIL is a law for the mean impact, which marginally decays as $1/\sqrt{\text{age}}$ and therefore demands an origin of time.

We develop a framework for an investor who trades until she either reaches a financial goal or an exogenous deadline arrives. Analogous to utility functions over wealth, we measure satisfaction with the timing of reaching a goal by a discount function. For a continuous-time market where a stochastic factor drives the dynamics of stock prices and the financial goals, the investor maximizes the expected discount at the goal reaching time and the expected utility of the funding ratio if the goal remains unreached by the deadline. This setup leads to a new class of stochastic control problems. We establish Bellman's principle of optimality and characterize the value function as a viscosity solution to the associated Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman equation. When the deadline is infinite and the goal is constant, the HJB equation reduces to a form related to the backward heat equation, for which we provide a complete characterization of smooth solutions. When analytical solutions are unavailable, we develop an approach based on Howard's algorithm to obtain numerical solutions. Our analysis shows that optimal investment policies for goal reaching problems can be decreasing in the drift of risky assets and need not converge to full risk-free investment even as volatility diverges to infinity.

Wavelet-based financial forecasters typically use the transform only to denoise, or reduce it to a single spectral snapshot at the forecast origin, and the convolution that produces the coefficients is usually bilateral, so it can read past the forecast origin. DSTNet instead retains the recent evolution of filter-bank magnitudes as a causal Dynamic Spectral Trajectory, built from seven trailing technical indicators over a twenty-day lookback with a one-sided Morlet-derived filter bank and an explicit burn-in for the left-boundary transient. A factorized Scale-Temporal Spectral Transformer attends along the time and filter-bank axes separately, a learned gate fuses the spectral branch with a CNN-BiLSTM, and horizon-specific gates emit one, three, five, and ten day forecasts in a single pass. We evaluate seven equity indices and gold under a common expanding-window protocol and an untouched one-year hold-out, against nine learned baselines and a random-walk persistence benchmark. Under MAE and MAPE, persistence is the strongest of the ten fixed competitors in 29 of the 32 series-horizon cells and DSTNet is the only model below it in every cell, by 0.7 to 0.9 percent at one day and 3.4 to 4.5 percent at ten days. At one day, paired testing favours DSTNet against the weaker learned baselines but is inconclusive against persistence and the strongest learned forecasters. A downstream allocation diagnostic does not support an equity-timing advantage on any of the seven indices.

Risk evaluation under distributional ambiguity is central to decision making in finance, economics, and operations research. Wasserstein balls provide a natural way to describe uncertainty around a reference distribution. We solve a natural yet open problem of robust optimization for the class of distortion riskmetrics with Wasserstein distance as the sole ambiguity constraint. This chosen objective class does not require convexity, monotonicity, and continuity of distortion functions, encompassing many common risk measures and deviation measures. First, we characterize conditions under which direct convexification preserves the worst-case value. Second, we develop a constructive method for exact worst-case evaluation when the direct convexification conditions fail. Third, we construct explicit approximate worst-case distributions and provide computable error bounds to assess their accuracy without solving the exact problem. We apply these results to distributionally robust portfolio selection and use numerical experiments to assess approximation accuracy and the resulting portfolio decisions.

Shallow models are special cases of deep models, and deep models theoretically have the potential to outperform the shallow ones. However, the existing empirical asset pricing literature provides strong benchmarks for shallow models. Residual learning allows neural network models in asset pricing to go deeper by preserving and refining their shallow counterparts. The out-of-sample Sharpe ratio for value-weighted long-short portfolios of deep residual models (2.07) is higher than that for the corresponding shallow ones (1.92) and more than twice that of the deep feedforward models (0.89). We show that model depth is a source of additional economic value in asset pricing. Residual learning can be used to deepen other neural-network-based asset pricing models if they contain intermediate layers. Our design also provides one way to scale asset pricing models, making native "large asset pricing models" more feasible.

In this paper, we present robust portfolio selection models by incorporating a reward and penalty mechanism into portfolio management. We assume that the joint distribution of the losses of the underlying risky assets in a portfolio is uncertain but lies within a multivariate distribution set. Our goal is to identify optimal portfolio allocations by minimizing the worst-case conditional value-at-risk (CVaR) of portfolio loss under the reward and penalty mechanism and distribution uncertainty. Our models can also be used to investigate the problem of how to balance portfolio losses with their associated downside risk in portfolio management. We first derive an explicit closed-form expression for the worst-case CVaR under the reward-penalty mechanism, which generalizes several existing models and results regarding the worst-case CVaR, such as those studied in Jagannathan (1977), Chen et al. (2011), and Cai et al. (2024). We then apply this expression to obtain optimal portfolio allocations that minimize the worst-case CVaR under both a classical mean-covariance-based multivariate distribution set and a generalized mean-covariance-based multivariate distribution set introduced in Kang et al. (2019). Additionally, we utilize real market data to illustrate the application of the proposed models and the corresponding optimal portfolio allocations in portfolio management. Our empirical experiments show that portfolios based on the proposed models have the potential to outperform those based on several existing related models. Furthermore, the results demonstrate that incorporating downside risk into portfolio loss helps better manage risk and can achieve higher investment returns than considering either downside risk or portfolio loss alone. Moreover, our experiments reveal the trade-off between improving expected portfolio return and controlling the worst-case portfolio CVaR.

FinVector-Market-4B adapts Qwen/Qwen3.5-4B with rank-16 LoRA on a 22,000-example corpus for structured financial tasks. We evaluate the base and adapted models on the same 600-example benchmark under implicit and explicit JSON-schema contracts. Supplying the schema alone raises base-model JSON validity from 0% to 91.3%. Under matched explicit prompting, the frozen scores improve from 14.7% to 40.0% for FinQA answer exact match, from 48.0% to 82.7% for calculator-expression correctness, from 20.1% to 89.5% for scenario branch-label agreement, and from 52.4% to 87.2% for implication-direction agreement. A post-hoc policy-scoring audit shows that the reported macro-F1 decline reflects a changing label set; using the same three target classes gives 77.4% for the base and 83.1% for the adapter. Filing overlap and calculator-target inconsistencies qualify the benchmark's generalization claims. The results show that compact financial domain adaptation can produce substantial task-specific gains beyond output-format learning under matched prompting, with gains bounded by the evaluated task distribution and prompt contract.

Regulated credit scoring requires scores monotone non-decreasing in every exposure input. Deployed pipelines – hand-crafted monotone aggregates feeding sign-constrained gradient boosting – already meet this by composition; the open question is what learned temporal aggregation is worth inside one. We answer on five production-scale credit datasets at matched admissibility (one priced baseline convention excepted), with a monotone recurrent architecture whose per-input guarantee we extend, with proofs, to vector-valued inputs and to exogenously macro-conditioned decay gates, severities, thresholds, and peak memory. Two findings result. First, a strictness ladder: the value of learned monotone features rises with governance-frame strictness – zero on unconstrained engineered panels, maximal in summaries-only frames – replicated across two datasets and an official temporal-stability metric, though unconditioned features degrade on externally adjudicated later weeks. Second, a conditioning-delivery asymmetry under regime shift. On a train-on-boom, test-on-crisis mortgage design, two public macroeconomic series hurt as input columns, yet conditioning the recurrence on them delivers the paper's only learned-block crisis-cohort uplifts. The confirmed effect: +0.006 to +0.013 AUC on an internally pre-registered Freddie Mac replication, at all five held-out seeds. The discovery estimate: +0.015 to +0.021 on Fannie Mae (three of five seeds post hoc), worth 10-27 basis points of defaulted balance at an 80% approval cutoff, and grows with early-prepaid loans excluded. A state-level test identifies the mechanism: between-cohort calibration transfer. A pandemic-band episode bounds scope: under forbearance-distorted labels the gain generalizes at a quarter to a third of crisis size on Fannie Mae, on Freddie Mac only against the capacity control.

I estimate firm-level capital-, labor-, and material-augmenting productivity for Chinese manufacturing, 1998–2008, and the effect of state-owned enterprise (SOE) privatization on each. Results show technological change is strongly biased toward capital and labor. Private firms operate above SOEs on capital and labor, but below on materials. Privatization raises labor-augmenting productivity right after the transition, a front-loaded gain that fades on the full panel but persists among 1998 incumbents. It leaves capital-augmenting productivity no higher and modestly lowers materials. The SOE sector's catch-up runs through restructuring of the plants the state kept, with exit of overstaffed plants adding to the labor gain.

We investigate a continuous-time financial market where the asset price exhibits weak (sublinear) mean reversion and has a nonzero drift. Complementing earlier work on strong (superlinear) mean reversion, we show that, for an investor maximizing expected exponential utility, the certainty equivalent grows as $O(T^{2\beta+1})$ where $0<\beta<1$ is the strength of mean reversion. An explicit asymptotically optimal strategy is also given.

The answers to many economic questions depend on the slope and curvature of demand. Estimating demand for differentiated products entails a trade-off between flexibility and scalability. Existing nonparametric approaches face a curse of dimensionality in the number of products. I develop a scalable nonparametric approach using market-level data that overcomes this curse through economically motivated restrictions embedded in many standard models. Simulations and an application to the U.S. beer market demonstrate flexibility in demand slope and curvature, with consequential differences in counterfactual price responses. Estimation in the application takes seconds, versus several hours for a random coefficient nested logit model.

Non-governmental organizations often compete for funding while valuing similar social outcomes. Fundraising may expand total giving to a cause or redirect a given funding pool toward the focal organization. This paper studies how cross-organizational purpose alignment changes the composition of such competition. The analysis separates two effects of fundraising: marginal lift in aggregate funding and marginal shift of funding between organizations. Incomplete alignment creates a wedge between an NGO's marginal mission return and the aggregate mission return that is proportional to shift minus lift. When NGOs choose among fundraising technologies, greater purpose alignment shifts effort toward the relatively lift-intensive technology. Relative to the aggregate mission benchmark, incompletely aligned NGOs choose portfolios that are too shift-intensive. A uniform restriction on fundraising may change total effort but cannot generally correct this composition distortion; correcting the portfolio requires changing relative incentives across technologies. A simple microfoundation interprets cause promotion as lift and organization promotion as shift. Productivity differences preserve reallocation when it raises mission output, while organization-specific benefits restore rivalry even under complete alignment. The model therefore predicts how a common purpose changes the form of competition even when its effect on the level of competition is ambiguous.

An organization may bind future decision makers through a commitment over its own lifespan. This paper studies that choice for philanthropic foundations. A foundation may commit to terminate, commit to institutional continuity, or leave termination to future discretion. Discretion preserves state-contingent stopping. Perpetuity instead raises investment in foundation-specific organizational capital whose return is partly lost upon termination. A terminal commitment limits excessive continuation when future governing bodies obtain private benefits from organizational survival. A canonical model yields nonempty regions in which each regime is optimal, while a finite-horizon extension endogenizes the terminal date. Perpetuity is optimal when organizational capital is sufficiently productive relative to the cost of continuing in bad states; discretion is optimal when stopping flexibility is valuable and governance is aligned; a finite lifespan is optimal when survival incentives create sufficiently costly entrenchment. Organizational lifespan is therefore a distinct commitment margin.

Classical growth theory places physical productivity at the center of economic growth. In modern service-based economies, however, growth increasingly means creating higher-valued products rather than increasing output quantities. This paper develops a theory of value growth based on a socially and institutionally sustained value scale. The framework unifies value creation, finance, and distribution and offers an account of major patterns in US economic history. The proposed framework is intended as a new approach to macroeconomic analysis and policy making.

Algorithmic recommendations can help participants navigate large matching markets. For example, recommendations for school and college choices may reduce information frictions and disparities in access to high-performing programs. At scale, however, recommenders in capacity-constrained settings can be self-defeating: if they steer too many users toward the same items, then even users who were originally predicted to have a high chance of matching to an item may not, due to increased competition. In this paper, we formalize this phenomenon of recommendation-induced congestion; motivated by the NYC high school match, we show that naive recommendations can cause sharp decreases in program acceptance rates, most affecting applicants with the fewest nearby options. Next, we propose and theoretically analyze a congestion-aware, bilevel optimize-and-simulate approach to allocate recommendations and improve match outcomes safely, in equilibrium. Finally, we deploy this approach in the 2025-26 admissions cycle of the NYC high school match, aiming to reduce disparities by highlighting personalized lists of nearby, high-performing programs where an applicant has a high predicted offer likelihood. In a randomized controlled trial, we find that 16.4% of treatment applicants ranked a recommended program, versus 10.5% of control applicants who ranked a program they would have been recommended (57% relative increase; $p$=0.011); 5.6% of treatment applicants matched to such a program, versus 3.3% of control applicants (71% relative increase; $p$=0.071); further, no treatment applicant was rejected from a recommended program. Our findings suggest that recommenders should be analyzed and designed as market-shaping interventions.