The Error Cost of Marriage

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Orli Oren-Kolbinger
Keyword(s):  
Error Cost

An Error Cost Approach to Competition Issues in Closed gTLDs

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoffrey A. Manne ◽  
Berin Michael Szoka
Keyword(s):  
Cost Approach ◽  
Error Cost

scholarly journals Investigation on Performance of Neural Networks Using Quadratic Relative Error Cost Function

IEEE Access ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 106642-106652 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ning Zhang ◽  
Shui-Long Shen ◽  
Annan Zhou ◽  
Ye-Shuang Xu
Keyword(s):  
Neural Networks ◽  
Cost Function ◽  
Relative Error ◽  
Error Cost

scholarly journals Searching with lies under error cost constraints

2008 ◽  
Vol 156 (9) ◽  
pp. 1444-1460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rudolf Ahlswede ◽  
Ferdinando Cicalese ◽  
Christian Deppe
Keyword(s):  
Cost Constraints ◽  
Error Cost

Error cost function for mirror‐based three‐dimensional reconstruction

2014 ◽  
Vol 50 (16) ◽  
pp. 1134-1136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wonil Chang ◽  
Keeseong Cho ◽  
Won Ryu ◽  
Soo‐Young Lee
Keyword(s):  
Cost Function ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Three Dimensional Reconstruction ◽  
Dimensional Reconstruction ◽  
Error Cost

Auditor choice as a commitment device

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 374-394
Author(s):  
Akihiro Noda
Keyword(s):  
Earnings Management ◽  
Capital Market ◽  
Private Information ◽  
Information Acquisition ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Limited Attention ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Auditor Choice ◽  
Error Cost ◽  
Commitment Device

Purpose This study aims to examine how firms choose an auditor in the presence of bilateral information asymmetry between insiders and outsiders regarding firms’ economic performance. Design/methodology/approach This study presents a one-period reporting bias game with a firm’s risk-neutral manager and investors in the capital market, in which a manager with private information chooses an auditor and reports earnings to investors who acquire their own information. The analysis focuses on the possibility that the manager engages an auditor to constrain earnings management as a commitment device to minimize reporting error cost. Findings The results show that the manager’s optimal auditor choice is determined based on investor sensitivity to the earnings report, and managerial incentives for earnings management, discounted by the uncertainty of reporting errors. The results for optimal auditor choice are counterintuitive: engaging a higher-quality auditor could seemingly be associated with aggressive earnings management. Originality/value This study advances the understanding of the theoretical basis of firms’ auditor choice in the context of market investors’ information acquisition when auditors exercise their discretion in reporting. This issue has received limited attention in the extant literature.

Economics of Criminal Procedure

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith N. Hylton
Keyword(s):  
Choice Model ◽  
Cost Model ◽  
Empirical Work ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Welfare Effects ◽  
Rent Seeking ◽  
The Public ◽  
Administrative Costs ◽  
The Third ◽  
Error Cost

This chapter reviews the economics of criminal procedure, proceeding through four topics in the literature. First, it reviews the implications of substantive criminal law theories for criminal procedure. The second part discusses the error cost model of criminal procedure, which is the dominant framework and posits that criminal procedure rules are designed to minimize the sum of error and administrative costs. The third part reviews the public choice model of criminal procedure. Under this model, criminal procedure rules are designed largely to regulate rent-seeking activity. The last part of this chapter discusses some of the empirical work on procedure that bears directly on deterrence and welfare effects.

Mitigating Allocation and Hydrocarbon Accounting Uncertainty Using More Frequent Flow Test Data

2019 ◽  
Vol 142 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahdi Sadri ◽  
Seyed M. Shariatipour
Keyword(s):  
Measurement Data ◽  
Time Interval ◽  
Total Production ◽  
Flow Meters ◽  
Flow Rates ◽  
Flow Test ◽  
Multi Phase Flow ◽  
Error Cost ◽  
Multi Phase ◽  
Yearly Cost

Abstract Although the application of multi-phase flow meters has recently increased, the production of individual wells in many fields is still monitored by occasional flow tests using test separators. In the absence of flow measurement data during the time interval between two consecutive flow tests, the flow rates of wells are typically estimated using allocation techniques. As the flow rates, however, do not remain the same over the time between the tests, there is typically a large uncertainty associated with the allocated values. In this research, the effect of the frequency of flow tests on the estimated total production of wells, allocation, and hydrocarbon accounting has been investigated. Allocation calculations have been undertaken for three different cases using actual and simulated production data based on one to four flow tests per month. Allocation errors for each case have subsequently been obtained. The results show that for all the investigated cases, the average allocation error decreased when the number of flow tests per month increased. The sharpest error reduction has been observed when the frequency of the tests increased from one to two times per month. It reduced the allocation error for the three investigated cases by 0.43%, 0.45%, and 1.11% which are equivalent to $18.2M (million), $18.9M, and $46.8M reduction in the yearly cost of the allocation error for the respective cases. The reductions in the allocation error cost for the three cases were $27M, $29M, and $80M, respectively, when the flow tests have been undertaken weekly instead of monthly.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document