Injectivity and the Law of Demand

Roy Allen

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 37 references

Injectivity and the Law of Demand

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A continuous demand mapping that satisfies the law of demand on an open convex domain is globally injective exactly when it is locally injective, which holds precisely when no non-degenerate line segment maps to a single point.

desk verdict Sound and useful core equivalence—global injectivity under the law of demand reduces to checking no non-degenerate constant line segment—but Proposition 5 is misstated as printed and Example 3 has an arithmetic slip. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.05714 v1 pith:R5YIPNMW submitted 2019-08-15 econ.EM

Roy Allen This is my paper · ORCID

classification econ.EM

keywords injectivitylawofdemandmappingglobalunivalencequasi-definiteJacobianconvexinverseimagesconnectedsubstitutesidentification

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper shows that for a continuous demand mapping $Q:U\subseteq\mathbb{R}^K\to\mathbb{R}^K$ satisfying the law of demand, $(Q(u)-Q(\tilde u))\cdot(u-\tilde u)\ge 0$, on an open convex domain $U$, global injectivity is equivalent to local injectivity, and both are equivalent to the absence of any non-degenerate line segment on which $Q$ is constant. The result matters because many identification and estimation methods require the demand mapping to be one-to-one, and checking global injectivity directly is hard; the paper reduces it to a local or one-dimensional check. The proof relies on the fact that under the law of demand, the inverse image of any quantity vector is convex, so two inputs with the same output force the whole segment between them to have the same output. In the differentiable case, the paper obtains necessary and sufficient conditions in terms of directional derivatives, generalizing classical conditions for quasi-definite Jacobians.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the convexity of inverse images: for a continuous monotone map $Q$ on an open convex domain, the set $Q^{-1}(y)=\{u\in U:Q(u)=y\}$ is convex (Lemma 1, a known result in monotone operator theory). This property carries the argument because if two distinct points map to the same $y$, convexity forces every point on the segment between them to map to $y$, creating a non-degenerate line segment of constancy. The law of demand provides the monotonicity that makes the preimage convex; differentiability then translates the 'no constant segment' condition into a directional-derivative condition stating that $Q'(u+\lambda v,v)$ cannot be the zero vector for all $\lambda$ in $[0,1]$.

What would settle it

Take a continuous mapping $Q:U\subset\mathbb{R}^2\to\mathbb{R}^2$ satisfying $(Q(u)-Q(\tilde u))\cdot(u-\tilde u)\ge 0$ on an open convex $U$, and search for a point $y$ whose preimage $Q^{-1}(y)$ contains two distinct points but not the segment joining them. Finding even one such example would falsify Lemma 1 and the equivalence between global injectivity and the line-segment condition.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Proposition 1: under Assumption 1, the following are equivalent: $Q$ is injective; $Q$ is locally injective; and the only line segments in $U$ along which $Q$ is constant are singleton points. The engine is Lemma 1, which states that every inverse image $Q^{-1}(y)$ is convex: if $Q(u)=Q(\tilde u)$, then the line segment from $u$ to $\tilde u$ lies in the inverse image. Consequently, a global collision between two distinct inputs implies a whole interval of collisions, so verifying injectivity reduces to checking that no such interval exists. For differentiable $Q$, the law of demand is exactly the weak quasi-definiteness of the Jacobian, and the paper derives a necessary and sufficient directional-derivative condition for injectivity that relaxes the usual Jacobian-invertibility requirement, along with extensions to restrictions of $Q$ to open or convex subsets and to demand systems that satisfy the law of demand after a homeomorphic or affine change of variables.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the demand mapping obeys the law of demand, meaning $(Q(u)-Q(\tilde u))\cdot(u-\tilde u)\ge 0$ for every pair in the domain; this monotonicity is what forces inverse images to be convex, and without it local injectivity need not imply global injectivity, as the example $Q(u)=u^2$ on $\mathbb{R}$ shows.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For any continuous demand map satisfying the law of demand on an open convex domain, checking global injectivity is equivalent to checking that no non-degenerate line segment is mapped to a single point.
Local injectivity at every point implies global injectivity, so identification arguments can be built from local conditions on demand systems.
In the differentiable case, Jacobian invertibility is sufficient but not necessary for injectivity; the precise condition is that no directional derivative vanishes along a whole segment.
The equivalence carries over to restrictions of the demand map to open or convex subsets, so injectivity can be verified on a region of interest using the same test.
The law-of-demand condition and the connected-substitutes condition are not nested, so the line-segment test covers demand systems with complementarity that connected-substitutes methods cannot handle.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

A natural extension is to turn the line-segment condition into a nonparametric empirical test: observing the same demand at two distinct utility vectors whose connecting segment lies in the domain would directly reject injectivity.
Because the law of demand is not ordinal, a monotone reparameterization can restore it, so the segment test might apply after a transformation even when the raw demand map fails the law of demand; the paper itself establishes local-global equivalence under homeomorphic changes and the full segment equivalence under affine changes.
In additive random utility models, aggregate choice probabilities inherit the law of demand from individual choices, so the segment test could be used to check whether the probability mapping is one-to-one in utility indices; the paper notes that injectivity depends on the distribution of heterogeneity.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The central result is the real thing. Under continuity and the law of demand on an open convex domain, global injectivity, local injectivity, and the absence of non-degenerate constant line segments are equivalent. The proof is a clean application of convexity of preimages for monotone operators, and the paper is honest that Lemma 1 is classical. What is new and useful is the translation into an econometric injectivity test that allows complementarity, which the connected-substitutes route does not handle. The non-convex domain extension (Proposition 2) and the directional-derivative characterization (Proposition 3) are genuine additions. I also give credit for the clear comparison with Berry-Gandhi-Haile and the non-nesting examples; the citation pattern is appropriate and there is no circularity.

The paper has two local defects that a referee should catch. First, Proposition 5 as printed is false. Condition (iii) refers to line segments in U along which Q is constant, but the claim is about the composed map ~Q = Q∘f on T. With T=U=R^2, Q(u)=u, and f(x,y)=(x,x), the composed map is not injective yet Q has no non-degenerate constant segments, so the printed equivalence fails. The intended condition is about ~Q on T, and then the convex-preimage argument works; this is a misstatement rather than a deep flaw. Second, Example 3 computes Q(1,2) as (-60,7); the correct value is (-60,15), giving inner product -30 rather than -46. The example still goes through, but the arithmetic should be fixed. Also, a few proofs are compressed: Corollary 2 is asserted without proof, the (iii)⇔(iv) step in Proposition 3 leans on an unstated mean value theorem application, and Lemma 3 is cited with proof omitted. None of these threaten the main equivalence, but a refereed version should expand them.

The law of demand is a genuine scope condition—demand systems with strong income effects can violate it—but the paper states this clearly and uses it as an assumption rather than hiding it. Within that assumption, the argument is correct.

This is a useful paper for applied econometricians working on demand invertibility with complementarity, and for discrete-choice empiricists. It deserves serious refereeing: the central result is worth publishing, and the local errors are fixable. I would recommend conditional accept after a revision that corrects Proposition 5, fixes the example, and fleshes out the compressed proofs.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops necessary and sufficient conditions for global injectivity of a demand mapping Q: U ⊆ R^K → R^K under a monotonicity condition called the law of demand: (Q(u) − Q(ũ)) · (u − ũ) ≥ 0. Under continuity and openness/convexity of U, the paper's Proposition 1 shows that global injectivity, local injectivity, and the absence of non-degenerate line segments on which Q is constant are equivalent. This reduces a global injectivity check to a local or line-segment check. The paper also connects the law of demand to weak quasi-definiteness of the Jacobian, presents a directional-derivative characterization of injectivity (Proposition 3), compares the approach to Berry, Gandhi, and Haile's connected substitutes condition, discusses quasilinear utility and additive random utility models, and extends the line-segment criterion to settings where the law of demand holds after an affine or homeomorphic change of variables.

Significance. If the main results hold, the paper provides a clean, parameter-free criterion for injectivity in a class of demand systems allowing complementarity, complementing existing sufficient conditions such as connected substitutes. The central equivalence in Proposition 1 is sound and is a useful nondifferentiable counterpart to Gale and Nikaido's Jacobian-based univalence theorems. The paper also explicitly credits classical monotone-operator theory, and the main argument does not rely on circular reasoning or fitted parameters. The law-of-demand assumption is a genuine scope condition: for non-monotone maps such as Q(u)=u² on R, local injectivity does not imply global injectivity, so the line-segment test is valid only within the stated monotonicity framework. The paper's significance is moderate but appropriate for an econometrics journal, given the role of injectivity in identification.

major comments (4)

[Section 7, Proposition 5] The printed equivalence (iii) is false as stated. Condition (iii) says 'The only line segments in U along which Q is constant are points,' but the proposition concerns the composed map Q̃ = Q∘f on T, and the condition must be about Q̃ on T. A concrete counterexample is T = U = R², Q(u) = u, and f(x,y) = (x,x). Then Q̃(x,y) = (x,x) is neither injective nor locally injective, yet Q has no nondegenerate constant line segments, so the printed condition (iii) holds while (i) and (ii) fail. The intended condition, 'the only line segments in T along which Q̃ is constant are points,' is what the convex-preimage argument establishes and should replace the printed condition.
[Section 5, Example 3] Example 3 contains an arithmetic error. For u = (0,0) and ũ = (1,2), the matrix product gives Q(ũ) = (20·1 + (−10)·8, −1·1 + 2·8) = (−60, 15), not (−60, 7). Consequently the displayed inner product is (−60, 15)·(1,2) = −30, not −46. The conclusion that the law of demand fails is unchanged, but the numbers should be corrected.
[Section 2, Corollary 2 and Section 3, Proposition 3] Corollary 2 is stated without proof, and it is load-bearing because Proposition 3 relies on the equivalence between (i) and (iii) from Corollary 2. The proof is likely the same line-segment argument as Corollary 1, but it should be written out. In Proposition 3, the proof of '(iii) iff (iv)' is compressed to a bare reference to the mean value theorem; since (iv) involves directional derivatives vanishing pointwise along the whole segment, the MVT argument should be spelled out, including the coordinate-wise application needed for a vector-valued demand mapping.
[Section 6, Lemma 3] Lemma 3 is cited to Rockafellar with the proof omitted. The result is used to draw a sharp equivalence between differentiability of C at Q(u) and singleton inverse images. Given that the manuscript's own contribution includes this lemma as a specialization, a proof or a precise pointer to the specific theorems in Rockafellar (Theorems 23.5 and 25.1) should be supplied, rather than 'proof omitted.'

minor comments (4)

[Abstract and throughout] There are several typos: 'mapp ing' in the abstract, 'substitability' in Section 5, 'and and' in Proposition 3 and Corollary 2, and 'denoting denoting' in Example 4. These should be corrected.
[Example 1] The notation '1tu P Au' is unusual; it would be clearer to write '1_{u ∈ A}' or explain that 1{·} is the indicator function in the text.
[Section 5] The reference to 'Berry et al. [2013]' in Section 8 should be 'Berry, Gandhi, and Haile [2013]' for consistency with the reference list.
[Section 3, proof of Proposition 2] The proof says 'by Proposition 3 because its directional derivatives are never zero,' but Proposition 3 appears later and the connection relies on condition (iv). Please add a forward reference or restate the relevant condition.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: main injectivity equivalence is derived from externally cited convex-preimage results; self-citations are non-load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is not circular. Proposition 1 follows from Lemma 1, which states that inverse images of a continuous monotone map on a convex open domain are convex; that lemma is cited to Rockafellar and Wets (2009) and Kassay, Pintea, and Szenkovits (2009), external results in monotone operator theory. The equivalence between global injectivity, local injectivity, and absence of nondegenerate constant line segments is then an immediate convexity argument, not an assumption equivalent to the conclusion. The paper fits no parameters, makes no empirical predictions, and introduces no hidden identification assumption that contains injectivity. The only self-citations (Allen and Rehbeck 2019, mentioned in Sections 6 and 6.2) report prior applications of the same known quasilinear and convex-analysis facts and are not load-bearing for Proposition 1 or the Gale-Nikaido comparison. The printed typo in Proposition 5's condition (iii), which refers to line segments in U rather than T, is a correctness issue, not a circularity; the intended statement is proven by the same convex-preimage argument. Accordingly, the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The results rest on the law of demand (a monotonicity shape restriction), continuity and convexity of the domain, and several standard theorems from monotone operator theory and convex analysis that are cited rather than proved. There are no free parameters and no invented entities; the paper is a pure theoretical contribution.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Q satisfies the law of demand: (Q(u)-Q(tilde u)) dot (u-tilde u) >= 0
Definition 1 and Assumption 1. This economic shape restriction drives the convex-fiber property (Lemma 1) and all subsequent equivalences. If it fails, the line-segment test is invalid, as the paper's Q(u)=u^2 example shows.
domain assumption Q is continuous and the domain U is open and convex
Assumption 1. Continuity and convexity are needed for Lemma 1 and for the line-segment arguments; Example 1 shows continuity cannot be dropped.
standard math Convexity of preimages for continuous monotone operators
Lemma 1 cites Rockafellar-Wets (p. 536) and Kassay-Pintea-Szenkovits (Theorem 3.5). This is the engine of Proposition 1; the paper does not prove it.
standard math For differentiable Q, the law of demand holds iff the Jacobian is everywhere weakly quasi-definite
Lemma 2, cited to Parthasarathy (p. 92). Connects the paper's monotonicity condition to the Gale-Nikaido Jacobian framework.
standard math Mean value theorem on component functions along a line segment
Used in the proof of Proposition 3 to show that zero directional derivatives along a segment imply Q is constant on that segment.
standard math Rockafellar's theorems on argmax correspondences of concave functions
Lemma 3, cited to Rockafellar (Theorems 23.5 and 25.1). Used in Section 6 to link differentiability of C at Q(u) to injectivity; proof omitted.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Injectivity and the Law of Demand." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/R5YIPNMW

@misc{pith2026190805714,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Injectivity and the Law of Demand},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/R5YIPNMW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.05714}
}

read the original abstract

Establishing that a demand mapping is injective is core first step for a variety of methodologies. When a version of the law of demand holds, global injectivity can be checked by seeing whether the demand mapping is constant over any line segments. When we add the assumption of differentiability, we obtain necessary and sufficient conditions for injectivity that generalize classical \cite{gale1965jacobian} conditions for quasi-definite Jacobians.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

[1]

Nonparametric counterfactual predictions in neoclassical models of international trade

Rodrigo Adao, Arnaud Costinot, and Dave Donaldson. Nonparametric counterfactual predictions in neoclassical models of international trade. American Economic Review, 107 0 (3): 0 633--89, 2017

work page 2017
[2]

Demand analysis using strategic reports: An application to a school choice mechanism

Nikhil Agarwal and Paulo Somaini. Demand analysis using strategic reports: An application to a school choice mechanism. Econometrica, 86 0 (2): 0 391--444, 2018

work page 2018
[3]

Simple estimators for invertible index models

Hyungtaik Ahn, Hidehiko Ichimura, James L Powell, and Paul A Ruud. Simple estimators for invertible index models. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 0 (just-accepted), 2017

work page 2017
[4]

Identification with additively separable heterogeneity

Roy Allen and John Rehbeck. Identification with additively separable heterogeneity. Econometrica, 8 0 (3): 0 1021--1054, 2019

work page 2019
[5]

On the stability of the competitive equilibrium, i

Kenneth J Arrow and Leonid Hurwicz. On the stability of the competitive equilibrium, i. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, pages 522--552, 1958

work page 1958
[6]

Some remarks on the equilibria of economic systems

Kenneth J Arrow and Leonid Hurwicz. Some remarks on the equilibria of economic systems. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, pages 640--646, 1960

work page 1960
[7]

Walrasian equilibrium in large, quasilinear markets

Eduardo M Azevedo, E Glen Weyl, and Alexander White. Walrasian equilibrium in large, quasilinear markets. Theoretical Economics, 8 0 (2): 0 281--290, 2013

work page 2013
[8]

Heterogeneity and the non-parametric analysis of consumer choice: conditions for invertibility

Walter Beckert and Richard Blundell. Heterogeneity and the non-parametric analysis of consumer choice: conditions for invertibility. The Review of Economic Studies, 75 0 (4): 0 1069--1080, 2008

work page 2008

Show all 37 references

[9]

Automobile prices in market equilibrium

Steven Berry, James Levinsohn, and Ariel Pakes. Automobile prices in market equilibrium. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, pages 841--890, 1995

1995
[10]

Connected substitutes and invertibility of demand

Steven Berry, Amit Gandhi, and Philip Haile. Connected substitutes and invertibility of demand. Econometrica, 81 0 (5): 0 2087--2111, 2013

2013
[11]

Estimating discrete-choice models of product differentiation

Steven T Berry. Estimating discrete-choice models of product differentiation. The RAND Journal of Economics, pages 242--262, 1994

1994
[12]

Nonparametric identification of multinomial choice demand models with heterogeneous consumers

Steven T Berry and Philip A Haile. Nonparametric identification of multinomial choice demand models with heterogeneous consumers. Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research, 2009

2009
[13]

Identification in differentiated products markets using market level data

Steven T Berry and Philip A Haile. Identification in differentiated products markets using market level data. Econometrica, 82 0 (5): 0 1749--1797, 2014

2014
[14]

Identification of nonparametric simultaneous equations models with a residual index structure

Steven T Berry and Philip A Haile. Identification of nonparametric simultaneous equations models with a residual index structure. Econometrica, 86 0 (1): 0 289--315, 2018

2018
[15]

Individual counterfactuals with multidimensional unobserved heterogeneity

Richard Blundell, Dennis Kristensen, Rosa Matzkin, et al. Individual counterfactuals with multidimensional unobserved heterogeneity. Technical report, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2017

2017
[16]

Yogurts choose consumers? identification of random utility models via two-sided matching

Odran Bonnet, Alfred Galichon, Keith O'Hara, and Matthew Shum. Yogurts choose consumers? identification of random utility models via two-sided matching. 2017

2017
[17]

The nonparametric approach to applied welfare analysis

Donald J Brown and Caterina Calsamiglia. The nonparametric approach to applied welfare analysis. Economic Theory, 31 0 (1): 0 183--188, 2007

2007
[18]

Estimation of nonparametric functions in simultaneous equations models, with an application to consumer demand

Donald J Brown and Rosa Liliana Matzkin. Estimation of nonparametric functions in simultaneous equations models, with an application to consumer demand. Citeseer, 1998

1998
[19]

Generalized instrumental variable models

Andrew Chesher and Adam M Rosen. Generalized instrumental variable models. Econometrica, 85 0 (3): 0 959--989, 2017

2017
[20]

On the nonparametric identification of multiple choice models

P Chiappori and Ivana Komunjer. On the nonparametric identification of multiple choice models. Manuscript, Columbia University, 2009

2009
[21]

Demand models for differentiated products with complementarity and substitutability

Mogens Fosgerau, Andre de Palma, and Julien Monardo. Demand models for differentiated products with complementarity and substitutability. 2018

2018
[22]

Unobserved heterogeneity in matching games

Jeremy T Fox, Chenyu Yang, and David H Hsu. Unobserved heterogeneity in matching games. Journal of Political Economy, 126 0 (4): 0 000--000, 2018

2018
[23]

The jacobian matrix and global univalence of mappings

David Gale and Hukukane Nikaido. The jacobian matrix and global univalence of mappings. Mathematische Annalen, 159 0 (2): 0 81--93, 1965

1965
[24]

Valuing new goods in a model with complementarity: Online newspapers

Matthew Gentzkow. Valuing new goods in a model with complementarity: Online newspapers. American Economic Review, 97 0 (3): 0 713--744, 2007

2007
[25]

law of demand

Werner Hildenbrand. On the" law of demand". Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, pages 997--1019, 1983

1983
[26]

On convexity of preimages of monotone operators

G \'a bor Kassay, Cornel Pintea, and Ferenc Szenkovits. On convexity of preimages of monotone operators. Taiwanese Journal of Mathematics, pages 675--686, 2009

2009
[27]

On injectivity of a class of monotone operators with some univalency consequences

Szil \'a rd L \'a szl \'o . On injectivity of a class of monotone operators with some univalency consequences. Mediterranean Journal of Mathematics, 13 0 (2): 0 729--744, 2016

2016
[28]

On the uniqueness of equilibrium once again

Andreu Mas-Colell. On the uniqueness of equilibrium once again. In William A Barnett, Bernard Cornet, Claude D'Aspremont, Jean Gabszewicz, and Andreu Mas-Colell, editors, Equilibrium Theory and Applications: Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium in Economic Theory a...

1991
[29]

Identification in nonparametric simultaneous equations models

Rosa L Matzkin. Identification in nonparametric simultaneous equations models. Econometrica, 76 0 (5): 0 945--978, 2008

2008
[30]

Estimation of nonparametric models with simultaneity

Rosa L Matzkin. Estimation of nonparametric models with simultaneity. Econometrica, 83 0 (1): 0 1--66, 2015

2015
[31]

Econometric models of probabilistic choice

Daniel McFadden. Econometric models of probabilistic choice. In Charles F. Manski and Daniel McFadden, editors, Structural Analysis of Discrete Data with Econometric Applications. Mit Press Cambridge, MA, 1981

1981
[32]

On p-and s-functions and related classes of n-dimensional nonlinear mappings

J Mor \'e and Werner Rheinboldt. On p-and s-functions and related classes of n-dimensional nonlinear mappings. Linear Algebra and its Applications, 6: 0 45--68, 1973

1973
[33]

On the surjectivity of the mapping between utilities and choice probabilities

Andriy Norets and Satoru Takahashi. On the surjectivity of the mapping between utilities and choice probabilities. Quantitative Economics, 4 0 (1): 0 149--155, 2013

2013
[34]

On global univalence theorems, volume 977 of Lecture Notes in Mathematics

Thiruvenkatachari Parthasarathy. On global univalence theorems, volume 977 of Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer, 2006

2006
[35]

Convex Analysis

R Tyrrell Rockafellar. Convex Analysis. Princeton University Press, 1970

1970
[36]

Variational analysis, volume 317

R Tyrrell Rockafellar and Roger J-B Wets. Variational analysis, volume 317. Springer Science & Business Media, 2009

2009
[37]

Estimating semi-parametric panel multinomial choice models using cyclic monotonicity

Xiaoxia Shi, Matthew Shum, and Wei Song. Estimating semi-parametric panel multinomial choice models using cyclic monotonicity. Econometrica, 86 0 (2): 0 737--761, 2018

2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Nonparametric counterfactual predictions in neoclassical models of international trade

Rodrigo Adao, Arnaud Costinot, and Dave Donaldson. Nonparametric counterfactual predictions in neoclassical models of international trade. American Economic Review, 107 0 (3): 0 633--89, 2017

work page 2017

[2] [2]

Demand analysis using strategic reports: An application to a school choice mechanism

Nikhil Agarwal and Paulo Somaini. Demand analysis using strategic reports: An application to a school choice mechanism. Econometrica, 86 0 (2): 0 391--444, 2018

work page 2018

[3] [3]

Simple estimators for invertible index models

Hyungtaik Ahn, Hidehiko Ichimura, James L Powell, and Paul A Ruud. Simple estimators for invertible index models. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 0 (just-accepted), 2017

work page 2017

[4] [4]

Identification with additively separable heterogeneity

Roy Allen and John Rehbeck. Identification with additively separable heterogeneity. Econometrica, 8 0 (3): 0 1021--1054, 2019

work page 2019

[5] [5]

On the stability of the competitive equilibrium, i

Kenneth J Arrow and Leonid Hurwicz. On the stability of the competitive equilibrium, i. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, pages 522--552, 1958

work page 1958

[6] [6]

Some remarks on the equilibria of economic systems

Kenneth J Arrow and Leonid Hurwicz. Some remarks on the equilibria of economic systems. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, pages 640--646, 1960

work page 1960

[7] [7]

Walrasian equilibrium in large, quasilinear markets

Eduardo M Azevedo, E Glen Weyl, and Alexander White. Walrasian equilibrium in large, quasilinear markets. Theoretical Economics, 8 0 (2): 0 281--290, 2013

work page 2013

[8] [8]

Heterogeneity and the non-parametric analysis of consumer choice: conditions for invertibility

Walter Beckert and Richard Blundell. Heterogeneity and the non-parametric analysis of consumer choice: conditions for invertibility. The Review of Economic Studies, 75 0 (4): 0 1069--1080, 2008

work page 2008