{
  "task_id": "F5-conf-01",
  "price_ratio_p1_over_p2": 0.8749999999999999,
  "x1_A": 4.114285714285715,
  "x2_A": 5.3999999999999995,
  "x1_B": 7.885714285714286,
  "x2_B": 4.6000000000000005,
  "excess_demand_good1": 0.0,
  "excess_demand_good2": 0.0,
  "walras_law_residual": 0.0,
  "walras_law_residual_max_abs_on_price_grid": 5.684341886080802e-14,
  "aggregate_endowment_good1": 12.0,
  "aggregate_endowment_good2": 10.0,
  "aggregate_endowment_good1_summary_sheet": 14.0,
  "excess_demand_good1_vs_summary_sheet_aggregate": -2.0,
  "price_ratio_numerical": 0.8749999999999998,
  "price_abs_diff_closed_vs_numerical": 1.1102230246251565e-16,
  "wealth_A": 9.0,
  "wealth_B": 11.5,
  "feasibility": "complete",
  "feasibility_reason": null,
  "data_issues": [
    {
      "issue": "parameters.csv aggregate_endowment_good1 = 14 is inconsistent with the sum of individual endowments in endowments.csv (8 + 4 = 12).",
      "handling": "Used the sum of individual endowments (12) as the aggregate endowment of good 1, because the individual endowments are the primary data and also determine agents' wealth; using the summary-sheet value would make the market-clearing condition inconsistent with the budget constraints (Walras' law would fail). The summary value was not used in any computation other than this diagnostic."
    }
  ],
  "n_input_rows": {
    "endowments.csv": 2,
    "parameters.csv": 4
  },
  "n_analysed": 2,
  "random_seed": null
}