1[2 {"id":"C1","text":"The closed-form Walrasian equilibrium relative price is p1/p2 = 0.875.","results_keys":["price_ratio_p1_over_p2"],"status":"supported","caveat":"Conditional on using the per-agent endowments (aggregate good 1 = 12) rather than the summary-sheet value 14."},3 {"id":"C2","text":"Independent root-finding of z1(p) reproduces the closed-form price to within 1.1e-16.","results_keys":["price_ratio_numerical","price_abs_diff_closed_vs_numerical"],"status":"supported","caveat":"Validated for this parameter set only."},4 {"id":"C3","text":"The equilibrium allocation is x1_A = 4.1143, x2_A = 5.4, x1_B = 7.8857, x2_B = 4.6.","results_keys":["x1_A","x2_A","x1_B","x2_B"],"status":"supported","caveat":"Interior Cobb-Douglas solution assumed."},5 {"id":"C4","text":"Both markets clear and Walras' law holds at the equilibrium price; the off-equilibrium Walras residual is within 7.1e-15.","results_keys":["excess_demand_good1","excess_demand_good2","walras_law_residual","walras_law_residual_offeq_max_abs"],"status":"supported","caveat":"Floating-point precision."},6 {"id":"C5","text":"The summary-sheet aggregate endowment of good 1 (14) is inconsistent with the per-agent endowments (sum 12); the latter were used.","results_keys":["aggregate_endowment_good1","aggregate_endowment_good1_recorded","data_issues"],"status":"supported","caveat":"Which source is erroneous cannot be determined from the data; the task designates per-agent endowments as primary."}7]8