# Analysis index — summary for scanning # Full details in docs/analyses/an-NNN-.md # # THIS FILE IS GENERATED — do not edit by hand. # Source of truth: YAML frontmatter on each docs/analyses/an-NNN-*.md page. # Regenerate via `python3 scripts/gen_analysis_index.py`. # # Fields: # id: an-NNN (sequential) # hypothesis: hypothesis slug or null # status: pending | done | stale # type: descriptive | causal | placebo | robustness # question: one-line research question # confidence: pending | green | yellow | red # tags: free-form list for filtering # file: path to analysis file (relative to project root) # script: path to source script (relative to project root) # target: primary output path under build/ - id: an-001 hypothesis: urgent-costlier-less-competitive status: done type: causal question: Does urgent procurement cost more and draw fewer bidders than ordinary procurement, within item, year, and buyer? confidence: yellow tags: ["H:urgent-costlier-less-competitive", urgent, motivation, prices, competition, causal] file: docs/analyses/an-001-urgent-vs-ordinary.md script: v10-causal-mechanism/analysis/50_v9_outputs.py target: v10-causal-mechanism/output/tables/tab_urgent_and_bounds.tex - id: an-002 hypothesis: utg-gap-selection-bounded status: done type: robustness question: Holding urgency fixed, how much more does the litigated urgent channel cost than the closest administrative urgent comparison, once selection into litigation is bounded? confidence: yellow tags: ["H:utg-gap-selection-bounded", lee-bounds, urgent, selection, robustness] file: docs/analyses/an-002-lee-bounds.md script: v10-causal-mechanism/analysis/40_utg_lee_bounds.R target: v10-causal-mechanism/output/tables/tab_urgent_and_bounds.tex - id: an-003 hypothesis: no-broad-same-firm-markup status: done type: causal question: Within the same firm, buyer, and item, does the same supplier charge a higher price under the litigated urgent regime than under the administrative urgent comparison? confidence: yellow tags: ["H:no-broad-same-firm-markup", within-firm, pricing, mechanism, causal] file: docs/analyses/an-003-within-firm-pricing.md script: v10-causal-mechanism/analysis/48_mechanism_evidence.R target: v10-causal-mechanism/output/tables/tab_within_firm_robustness.tex - id: an-004 hypothesis: thin-market-supplier-leverage status: done type: robustness question: Does the litigated-urgent price gap concentrate in thin markets — off-formulary molecules and shallow supplier pools — where suppliers retain leverage? confidence: yellow tags: ["H:thin-market-supplier-leverage", market-depth, formulary, heterogeneity, robustness] file: docs/analyses/an-004-market-depth-heterogeneity.md script: v10-causal-mechanism/analysis/52_market_depth_heterogeneity.R target: v10-causal-mechanism/output/tables/tab_market_depth_heterogeneity.tex - id: an-005 hypothesis: lost-scale status: done type: descriptive question: How does the litigated-over-administrative urgent price gap split between same-firm pricing and supplier-set sourcing, and how much of it is lost scale? confidence: yellow tags: ["H:lost-scale", decomposition, sourcing, pricing, scale, mechanism] file: docs/analyses/an-005-pricing-sourcing-decomposition.md script: v10-causal-mechanism/analysis/45_reconciliation.R target: v10-causal-mechanism/output/figures/fig_sourcing_vs_pricing.pdf - id: an-006 hypothesis: supplier-set-reallocation status: done type: descriptive question: When the same buyer buys the same item under both urgent regimes, does the set of winning suppliers change? confidence: green tags: ["H:supplier-set-reallocation", winner-switching, sourcing, supplier-set, descriptive] file: docs/analyses/an-006-winner-switching.md script: v10-causal-mechanism/analysis/48_mechanism_evidence.R target: v10-causal-mechanism/output/tables/tab_winner_switch.tex - id: an-007 hypothesis: utg-gap-selection-bounded status: done type: robustness question: Does the administrative-minus-litigated urgent-price gap survive wild-cluster bootstrap inference when the number of purchasing-buyer-units (PBU) clusters is small and uneven? confidence: green tags: ["H:utg-gap-selection-bounded", wild-cluster-bootstrap, inference, robustness, utg-contrast] file: docs/analyses/an-007-wild-cluster-bootstrap.md script: v10-causal-mechanism/analysis/44_wild_bootstrap.R target: v10-causal-mechanism/output/tables/tab_utg_boottest.tex - id: an-008 hypothesis: placebo-and-dynamics status: done type: placebo question: Do never-litigated items show a spurious negotiated-price gap that would indicate a generic platform or time-trend explanation rather than a litigation-specific effect? confidence: yellow tags: ["H:placebo-and-dynamics", placebo, falsification, robustness] file: docs/analyses/an-008-placebo-never-litigated.md script: v10-causal-mechanism/analysis/20_falsification_and_supplier_fe.R target: v10-causal-mechanism/output/tables/tab_placebo.tex - id: an-009 hypothesis: lost-scale status: done type: robustness question: When purchases are aggregated within buyer-item-month cells, do administrative and litigated cells differ in scale and in the fragmentation of repeated demand? confidence: yellow tags: ["H:lost-scale", aggregation, scale, sourcing, robustness, diagnostic] file: docs/analyses/an-009-aggregation-cells.md script: v10-causal-mechanism/analysis/48_mechanism_evidence.R target: v10-causal-mechanism/output/tables/tab_aggregation_cells.tex - id: an-010 hypothesis: placebo-and-dynamics status: done type: robustness question: What does a dynamic Borusyak-Jaravel-Spiess event study show after exposure, and does the Honest-DiD sensitivity survive deviations at the observed maximum pre-period scale? confidence: yellow tags: ["H:placebo-and-dynamics", event-study, bjs, honest-did, rambachan-roth, robustness, diagnostic] file: docs/analyses/an-010-dynamic-bjs-honestdid.md script: v10-causal-mechanism/analysis/43_rambachan_roth.R target: v10-causal-mechanism/output/tables/tab_dynamic_sensitivity_summary.tex - id: an-011 hypothesis: null status: done type: descriptive question: What is the annual fiscal procurement-cost implication of the litigated-urgent price gap, given the Lee-bound midpoint and an admissibility calibration? confidence: yellow tags: [procurement-cost, fiscal, lee-bounds, descriptive] file: docs/analyses/an-011-procurement-cost.md script: v10-causal-mechanism/analysis/46_procurement_cost_bound.R target: v10-causal-mechanism/output/tables/tab_procurement_cost_bound.tex - id: an-012 hypothesis: null status: done type: descriptive question: How accurately does the urgency classifier label purchase orders, validated against a ground-truth set, and does any residual error bias the regime contrasts? confidence: green tags: [classifier, validation, measurement, descriptive] file: docs/analyses/an-012-classifier-validation.md script: v10-causal-mechanism/analysis/49_classifier_macros.py target: v10-causal-mechanism/output/tables/tab_classifier_validation_v9.tex - id: an-013 hypothesis: placebo-and-dynamics status: done type: placebo question: Does the never-litigated placebo remain null inside buyer-by-class environments that also contain litigated purchases? confidence: green tags: ["H:placebo-and-dynamics", placebo, specificity, buyer-class, robustness] file: docs/analyses/an-013-litigation-specificity-placebos.md script: v10-causal-mechanism/analysis/65_h7_specificity_placebos.R target: v10-causal-mechanism/output/tables/tab_h7_placebo_battery.tex