Data audit (P1)
| file | sha256 | rows | cols |
|---|---|---|---|
| data/endowments.csv | fc130a2f54c750a5834ec7314060d91f7984769c7c006ad04b98582a016ba74b | 2 | 3 (agent, good1, good2) |
| data/parameters.csv | 717807e75337fbf4aff8e4d74e0fc0b83b799f78fa689172be0d501cb3e43983 | 4 | 3 (parameter, value, description) |
- endowments: A=(8,2), B=(4,8); units of goods; all strictly positive; no missing, no duplicate agents. No dates (theoretical data).
- parameters: alpha_A=0.4, alpha_B=0.6 (both in (0,1)); aggregate_endowment_good1=14.0, aggregate_endowment_good2=10.0. No missing/duplicates.
- Anomaly: recorded aggregate_endowment_good1=14.0 but sum of individual endowments = 8+4 = 12.0. Good 2: recorded 10.0 = 2+8, consistent.
- Decision: TASK.md designates endowments.csv as primary data; the summary sheet is secondary. Use 12.0 (sum of individual endowments) in market clearing; the 14.0 is inconsistent with the agents' endowments (an allocation summing to 14 is not feasible from the agents' resources) and is reported in data_issues. Sensitivity: price implied by using 14 is computed and reported (results key
diagnostic_price_if_recorded_aggregate_used). - No information-availability violations (only data/ used).