% Author: Simon-Pierre Boucher — contact@spboucher.ai
% Generated by scripts/06_tables.py — do not edit by hand.
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\centering
\caption{Hedonic model comparison ($n = 17{,}087$).}
\label{tab:model_comparison}
\begin{threeparttable}
\small
\begin{adjustbox}{max width=\textwidth}
\begin{tabular}{clR{1.3cm}R{1.3cm}R{1.6cm}R{1.6cm}R{0.8cm}R{1.8cm}}
\toprule
& \textbf{Specification} & $\boldsymbol{R^2}$ & \textbf{Adj.}~$\boldsymbol{R^2}$ & \textbf{AIC} & \textbf{BIC} & $\boldsymbol{k}$ & $\boldsymbol{\Delta R^2}$ \textbf{vs.\ A} \\
\midrule
A & Structural only & 0.4525 & 0.4523 & 26{,}165 & 26{,}219 & 6 & --- \\
B & + Description length & 0.4647 & 0.4645 & 25{,}779 & 25{,}841 & 7 & +0.012 \\
C & + Semantic similarities (20) & 0.4962 & 0.4954 & 24{,}783 & 24{,}992 & 26 & +0.044 \\
D & Full model (B + C) & \textbf{0.5122} & \textbf{0.5115} & \textbf{24{,}232} & 24{,}448 & 27 & +0.060 \\
E & Parsimonious (sig.\ only) & 0.5118 & 0.5111 & 24{,}239 & \textbf{24{,}425} & 23 & +0.059 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\begin{tablenotes}
\footnotesize
\item \textit{Notes:} $k$ denotes the number of regressors excluding the intercept. Bold values indicate the best fit for each criterion. Models are estimated by OLS with HC3 robust standard errors.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\end{table}
