1{2 "task_id": "F5-conf-01",3 "price_ratio_p1_over_p2": 0.8749999999999999,4 "x1_A": 4.114285714285715,5 "x2_A": 5.3999999999999995,6 "x1_B": 7.885714285714286,7 "x2_B": 4.6000000000000005,8 "excess_demand_good1": 0.0,9 "excess_demand_good2": 0.0,10 "walras_law_residual": 0.0,11 "aggregate_endowment_good1": 12.0,12 "aggregate_endowment_good2": 10.0,13 "aggregate_endowment_good1_summary_sheet": 14.0,14 "aggregate_endowment_good2_summary_sheet": 10.0,15 "price_ratio_numerical": 0.8750000000000001,16 "price_abs_diff_closed_vs_numerical": 2.220446049250313e-16,17 "feasibility": "complete",18 "feasibility_reason": null,19 "data_issues": [20 {21 "issue": "parameters.csv aggregate_endowment_good1=14.0 differs from the sum of individual endowments in endowments.csv (12.0).",22 "handling": "Used the sum of individual endowments (12.0) since aggregate endowment in a pure exchange economy is by definition the sum of individual endowments and endowments.csv is the primary data. Diagnostic: clearing good 1 against 14.0 would give p=0.666667 with good-2 excess demand -1.333333 != 0, i.e. no consistent equilibrium; the summary value is treated as a recording error."23 }24 ],25 "n_input_rows": {26 "endowments.csv": 2,27 "parameters.csv": 428 },29 "n_analysed": 2,30 "random_seed": null31}