IESET.
Hypotheses·energy·capacity_energy_shock_transfers_vs_price_controls

Energy-shock relief works better as targeted transfers or temporary tax smoothing in high-capacity states; administered price controls/subsidies predict shortages, fiscal slippage, or lower investment where pass-through is suppressed for long periods.

PARTIALengine/runs/capacity_energy_shock_transfers_vs_price_controls

PARTIAL — coef=+7.745e-11, p=0.229 (above α=0.1); direction inconclusive

confidence cueThe result is useful, but not decisive. Treat it as a clue, not a settled conclusion.

policy briefMixed or noisy

In ordinary language

In plain terms, this asks whether fossil fuel consumption subsidies is actually linked to better or worse cpi inflation from 1990 to 2024.

plain answer

The evidence is suggestive but not decisive. coef=+7.745e-11, p=0.229 (above α=0.1); direction inconclusive

why it matters

This matters because energy claims should change belief only when they survive a pre-declared empirical test.

how the test works

It compares 1 country or place units from 1990 to 2024, using a panel fe design, with fixed effects for country and year.

what was measured
What changed
  • Fossil fuel consumption subsidies
What we checked
  • Cpi inflation
what this does not prove

A single test is not the whole truth. It narrows the claim under a specific sample, time period, and method. Strong policy conclusions need the pattern to survive nearby tests, alternative data, and serious objections.

verification

No evidence packet has been generated yet.

Results

engine/runs/capacity_energy_shock_transfers_vs_price_controls
1007550250199020072024GLOBAL
illustrative sketch · run pending
No coefficients yet. When the model fires, this chart will show cpi_inflation across 1 sampled countries over 1990–2024.
The shapes above are stylised — none of the lines are real data.
Placeholder for capacity_energy_shock_transfers_vs_price_controls. Published chart will be generated from engine/runs/capacity_energy_shock_transfers_vs_price_controls/chart_data.json.

Who has skin in the game — schools predicting on this

17 schools list this hypothesis as a test of their position. The chips below are school-level scoreboard outcomes, not a second hypothesis verdict.

hypothesis verdict vs scoreboard outcome

The banner verdict judges this hypothesis as written. The scoreboard asks whether each school's polarity-corrected prediction was right. Raw status is not a school win: SUPPORTED supports schools that needed SUPPORTED, but refutes schools that needed REFUTED.

Austrian Business Cycle Theory (ABCT)wins if MIXEDpartial/no-callChicago School Monetarismwins if MIXEDpartial/no-callClassical Liberalwins if MIXEDpartial/no-callDegrowth / Ecological Macroeconomicswins if MIXEDpartial/no-callDemocratic Socialism (Bernsteinian revisionism + modern)wins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callStructuralist / Developmentalistwins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callEco-Socialism / Red-Greenwins if MIXEDpartial/no-callEmpirical Pragmatist (the framework's house position)wins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callNew Institutional Economicswins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callMarket Socialism (Lange-Lerner tradition)wins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callMarxian Political Economywins if MIXEDpartial/no-callMarxism-Leninism (central-planning implementation)wins if MIXEDpartial/no-callModern Monetary Theorywins if MIXEDpartial/no-callNew Keynesian (mainstream synthesis)wins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callOrdoliberalism (Freiburg School)wins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callPost-Keynesianwins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callSocial Democraticwins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-call

Pre-registration

registration ordering unverified
first-spec commit 4c8ce8e · 2026-07-18T22:11:21Z
run generated · 2026-06-29T17:52:03Z
Run timestamp predates this path's first git-add commit (rebase, rename, or pre-git local run). Spec hash is still the path's first-add commit — not repository HEAD — but ordering is not a clean pre-registration proof.

Energy-shock relief works better as targeted transfers or temporary tax smoothing in high-capacity states; administered price controls/subsidies predict shortages, fiscal slippage, or lower investment where pass-through is suppressed for long periods.

Falsification criterion — what would disprove this

set before the run · honoured after

This hypothesis is considered falsified if:

SUPPORTED if the primary treatment coefficient has the pre-registered + sign at p<=0.10 with minimum sample gates. REFUTED if the coefficient has the opposite sign at p<=0.10. Otherwise PARTIAL; missing data or failed sample gates are INCONCLUSIVE_DATA_PENDING.

formal test & threshold
test:      panel_fe_capacity_energy_shock_transfers_vs_price_controls
threshold: [object Object]

Method

Template
panel_fe
Fixed effects
country, year
Clustering
country
Sample
1 countries · 1990 – 2024
Evidence type
associational

Alias-batch panel fixed effects screen. The proxy source is explicitly local and runnable, but exact policy semantics should be upgraded before scoreboard conversion.

Data

VariableSourceTransform
cpi_inflation
outcome
world_bank_wdi:FP.CPI.TOTL.ZGtier 2
level
fossil_fuel_consumption_subsidies
treatment
owid:consumption-subsidies-for-fossil-fuelstier 2
level_lagged_one_year
log_gdp_pc
control
world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.KDtier 2
log
trade_openness
control
world_bank_wdi:NE.TRD.GNFS.ZStier 2
level
government_effectiveness
control
wgi:GE.ESTtier 4
level

● ready  · ● pending  · ● reconstruct-needed

Detailed result card

Result card — capacity_energy_shock_transfers_vs_price_controls

Verdict: PARTIAL — coef=+7.745e-11, p=0.229 (above α=0.1); direction inconclusive

Pre-registration

  • Claim: Energy-shock relief works better as targeted transfers or temporary tax smoothing in high-capacity states; administered price controls/subsidies predict shortages, fiscal slippage, or lower investment where pass-through is suppressed for long periods.
  • Falsification rule: SUPPORTED if the primary treatment coefficient has the pre-registered + sign at p<=0.10 with minimum sample gates. REFUTED if the coefficient has the opposite sign at p<=0.10. Otherwise PARTIAL; missing data or failed sample gates are INCONCLUSIVE_DATA_PENDING.
  • Falsification test: panel_fe_capacity_energy_shock_transfers_vs_price_controls

Estimate

  • Method: linearmodels.PanelOLS
  • Coefficient (treatment): +7.745e-11
  • Std error: 6.427e-11
  • p-value: 0.229
  • Observations: 495, countries: 36
  • Within R²: 0.0568
  • Fixed effects: entity=True, time=True
  • Clustering: country

Variables resolved

  • world_bank_wdi:FP.CPI.TOTL.ZG → cpi_inflation (outcome, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=7550)
  • owid:consumption-subsidies-for-fossil-fuels → fossil_fuel_consumption_subsidies (treatment, publisher=owid, n=686)
  • world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.KD → log_gdp_pc (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=12104)
  • world_bank_wdi:NE.TRD.GNFS.ZS → trade_openness (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=10714)
  • wgi:GE.EST → government_effectiveness (controls, publisher=wgi, n=5168)

Generated by scripts/run_panel_fe.py at 2026-06-29T17:52:03+00:00

Strongest opposing argument

Every hypothesis ships with its charitable opposing argument. The framework earns credibility by handling objections at their strongest, not weakest.

Notes

Source shard: engine/audits/swarm_2026-05-22_200_hypotheses_worker_C_state_capacity_mixed.md. Backlog source families: not specified. Alias proxy used: owid:consumption-subsidies-for-fossil-fuels -> world_bank_wdi:FP.CPI.TOTL.ZG. Initial promotion pass left scoreboard mapping empty; mapped by the 2026-05-22 swarm scoreboard conversion v1.

Authored framework. Read the transparency note.