Data audit (P1)
| file | SHA-256 | 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; no missing values, no duplicate agents, all strictly positive.
- parameters: alpha_A=0.4, alpha_B=0.6 (both in (0,1)); aggregate_endowment_good1=14, aggregate_endowment_good2=10.
- No dates (theoretical exercise), so no time-availability issues.
- Anomaly: summary aggregate good 1 = 14 ≠ 8+4 = 12 from individual endowments. Good 2 consistent (2+8=10).
Decision: use 12 (primary individual data; required for consistency with budget constraints / Walras' law). Reported in data_issues; sensitivity key
sensitivity_excess_demand_good1_vs_summary_E1= -2 shows the excess demand that would appear against the summary value. - No rows excluded (see out/exclusions.csv).