1{2 "validation_errors": [],3 "repairs": [4 "dropped hedging.typical_devices_note"5 ],6 "doc_id": "jof_12856",7 "ontology_version": "1.0",8 "prompt_version": "1.0",9 "model": "claude-opus-5-5",10 "effort": "medium",11 "annotated_at": "2026-11-03T23:26:47+00:00",12 "source_sha256": "9c4ffadde6f75d248c75344dadd42dcb458732fa34e33c66954163ce35705286",13 "parser": "pymupdf-jof-heuristics-1.3",14 "payload_chars": 20041,15 "usage": {16 "input": 6680,17 "output": 2327,18 "cache_read": 3968,19 "cache_write": 020 },21 "cost_usd": 0.074054,22 "request_id": "req_011Cggqf9Fj9HKLBS3fthWkz",23 "annotation": {24 "genre": "theoretical",25 "subfield": "corporate_finance",26 "subfield_secondary": "household_finance (mortgage contract design; contract theory under asymmetric information)",27 "primary_method": "theoretical_model_analytical",28 "identification": {29 "estimand": "not applicable (theory paper; target is existence conditions for a noncontingent contracts equilibrium)",30 "strategy": "not applicable; analytical model of competitive lending with lender private information about index quality, with equilibrium refinements",31 "key_assumptions": [32 "Lenders privately observe the quality of the index as a measure of the true external state",33 "Lenders are risk-averse with respect to promises (value larger promises more in bad external states)",34 "Competitive lenders; standard belief refinements govern off-equilibrium beliefs",35 "Index is observable and verifiable, while the true state is revealed only after renegotiation is no longer possible"36 ],37 "threats_addressed": [],38 "causal_language_strength": 2,39 "uses_causal_claim": false40 },41 "abstract_moves": {42 "question": {43 "present": true,44 "sentence_index": 045 },46 "gap": {47 "present": false,48 "sentence_index": -149 },50 "method": {51 "present": true,52 "sentence_index": 153 },54 "results": {55 "present": true,56 "sentence_index": 557 },58 "magnitude": {59 "present": false,60 "sentence_index": -161 },62 "contribution": {63 "present": true,64 "sentence_index": 065 }66 },67 "introduction": {68 "moves": [69 {70 "paragraph_index": 0,71 "move": "motivation"72 },73 {74 "paragraph_index": 0,75 "move": "tension_or_puzzle"76 },77 {78 "paragraph_index": 0,79 "move": "literature_gap"80 },81 {82 "paragraph_index": 0,83 "move": "preview_of_approach"84 },85 {86 "paragraph_index": 1,87 "move": "mechanism_or_theory_sketch"88 },89 {90 "paragraph_index": 2,91 "move": "mechanism_or_theory_sketch"92 },93 {94 "paragraph_index": 2,95 "move": "preview_of_results"96 },97 {98 "paragraph_index": 3,99 "move": "related_literature_positioning"100 },101 {102 "paragraph_index": 4,103 "move": "related_literature_positioning"104 },105 {106 "paragraph_index": 5,107 "move": "related_literature_positioning"108 },109 {110 "paragraph_index": 6,111 "move": "related_literature_positioning"112 },113 {114 "paragraph_index": 7,115 "move": "related_literature_positioning"116 },117 {118 "paragraph_index": 7,119 "move": "policy_or_broader_implication"120 },121 {122 "paragraph_index": 8,123 "move": "roadmap"124 }125 ],126 "contribution_paragraph_index": 0,127 "contribution_types": [128 "new_theory_or_model",129 "resolution_of_puzzle"130 ],131 "roadmap_present": true,132 "literature_positioning_location": "inside_introduction"133 },134 "section_roles": [135 {136 "idx": 0,137 "role": "introduction"138 },139 {140 "idx": 1,141 "role": "theory"142 },143 {144 "idx": 2,145 "role": "theory"146 },147 {148 "idx": 3,149 "role": "theory"150 },151 {152 "idx": 4,153 "role": "theory"154 },155 {156 "idx": 5,157 "role": "theory"158 },159 {160 "idx": 6,161 "role": "robustness"162 },163 {164 "idx": 7,165 "role": "conclusion"166 },167 {168 "idx": 8,169 "role": "appendix"170 },171 {172 "idx": 9,173 "role": "appendix"174 }175 ],176 "results_presentation": {177 "economic_significance_discussed": false,178 "statistical_significance_language": "unclear",179 "magnitude_statements_in_intro": false180 },181 "robustness": {182 "location": "main_text_section",183 "types": [184 "other"185 ]186 },187 "tables": {188 "convention_notes": "A single appendix table lists functional forms and parameter values for the numerical costly-state-verification example. It contains no regression output.",189 "units_stated_in_notes": false,190 "standard_errors_description": "none"191 },192 "figures": {193 "uncertainty_shown": "no_figures"194 },195 "conclusion": {196 "bounded_claims": true,197 "policy_implications": false,198 "open_questions": false,199 "restates_contribution": true200 },201 "hedging": {202 "level": "moderate",203 "typical_devices": [204 "conditional framing ('under the conditions described in our model')",205 "sufficient-conditions phrasing rather than necessity",206 "modal verbs ('might', 'can arise', 'may be concerned')",207 "'arguably', 'loosely speaking'"208 ]209 },210 "claim_evidence": [211 {212 "claim": "Contracts, notably mortgages, widely fail to condition repayments on available indices despite proposals favoring indexation",213 "evidence_type": "prior_literature",214 "evidence_ref": "Intro paras 0 and 7 (e.g., Caplin et al. 2007; Mian and Sufi 2015)"215 },216 {217 "claim": "A noncontingent equilibrium exists in a two-state numerical example because a contingent offer carries a premium that low-quality-index lenders gain from",218 "evidence_type": "equation_or_proof",219 "evidence_ref": "Intro paras 1-2; Section I"220 },221 {222 "claim": "Sufficient conditions guarantee a noncontingent equilibrium even though it is ex ante Pareto-inferior to full risk-sharing",223 "evidence_type": "equation_or_proof",224 "evidence_ref": "Section V; Proposition 3; Appendix B"225 },226 {227 "claim": "The conditions of the general theorem hold in a stylized mortgage model with default",228 "evidence_type": "equation_or_proof",229 "evidence_ref": "Section II; Proposition 1 proof in Appendix B"230 },231 {232 "claim": "A costly-state-verification model satisfies the key assumptions under specific functional forms",233 "evidence_type": "table",234 "evidence_ref": "Appendix A; Table A.I"235 },236 {237 "claim": "Under monopoly lending the noncontingent equilibrium persists while the full-information equilibrium does not",238 "evidence_type": "equation_or_proof",239 "evidence_ref": "Section VI.B"240 }241 ],242 "structural_summary": "The paper opens with the puzzle that contracts rarely index to public measures such as house-price indices. It rejects incomplete-contract and transaction-cost explanations and proposes an asymmetric-information mechanism. A numerical example in the introduction sketches two equilibria and the 'lemon insurance' intuition. Extended positioning against the incomplete-contracts, insurance and mortgage-design literatures follows, then a roadmap. The body escalates in generality: a simple example, a mortgage application, the general model and equilibrium definition, preliminary zero-profit analysis, the main sufficient-conditions theorem, and extensions (profits, monopoly, alternative forms of adverse selection). A short conclusion restates the theory. Appendices give a costly-state-verification numerical example and the proofs.",243 "writing_profile_keywords": [244 "pure theory",245 "asymmetric information",246 "contract theory",247 "example-first exposition",248 "sufficient conditions",249 "equilibrium refinement",250 "mortgage indexation",251 "literature contrast"252 ],253 "confidence": 0.85,254 "notes": "No empirical analysis; empirical-only fields are set to none or unclear. Section IV ('Preliminary Analysis') is tagged theory. Section VI (extensions) is mapped to robustness with type 'other' because it checks how the model's results change under alternative assumptions."255 },256 "deterministic_checks": {257 "roadmap_regex": true,258 "contribution_regex_in_intro": false,259 "magnitude_in_abstract": false,260 "abstract_n_sentences": 6,261 "intro_n_paragraphs": 9,262 "intro_n_words": 1659,263 "causal_words_in_abstract": 1,264 "hedge_words_in_abstract": 1,265 "stars_mentioned": false,266 "clustered_se_mentioned": false,267 "internet_appendix_mentioned": false,268 "section_roles_rule": {269 "0": "introduction",270 "1": "theory",271 "2": "theory",272 "3": "theory",273 "4": "other",274 "5": "theory",275 "6": "robustness",276 "7": "conclusion",277 "8": "appendix",278 "9": "appendix"279 }280 },281 "schema_valid": true,282 "code_version": "87c73cd-dirty"283}