Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming measurement in economics. AI models convert unstructured data, such as text and images, into structured variables at low cost, making previously prohibitive measurement feasible at scale. This shifts the bottleneck from finding any scalable measure of a phenomenon to choosing among many plausible ones, which may support different empirical conclusions. This review provides guidance for navigating that shift. We describe three stages at which AI enters the measurement pipeline---discovery, construct definition, and observation---and what each demands of researchers. We argue that credible inference with AI-generated variables requires appropriately designed validation: anchoring measurement to explicit criteria, rather than informal claims that a proxy is reasonable. We then examine how validation samples support valid inference even when AI predictions are arbitrarily biased, and what can be done when a random validation sample is unavailable.
Probably not, at least for meta-analyses in economics. In a pre-registered, identity-masked, within-paper experiment, the authors of 44 meta-analyses ranked three AI reports on their own paper by usefulness for improving it: a single pass by a frontier model against two multi-agent debate tools we built and expected to win. All reports were held to a common length and template. The authors preferred the single pass, by 0.66 rank points over mad-research (95% CI 0.32 to 1.00) and 0.57 over paper-workshop (0.16 to 0.95), though paper-workshop spent roughly thirty times the tokens. Authors who recalled their journal referee report usually placed it first and never last; in a separate exercise, three AI judges almost always placed the real journal referee report last. Among the three AI reports, Gemini (the judge whose model family wrote none of the reports) would have ranked paper-workshop first in the authors' place, reversing the single-pass preference. The reversal warns against substituting an AI judge for the author. We measure perceived usefulness for finished papers; whether AI should referee papers is a separate question.
Xianhua Peng, Wu Guo, Songyan Wang +1q-fin.CP econ.EM math.OC stat.ML
This paper proposes the certainty-equivalent first-order learning (CEFOL) algorithm, a deep learning algorithm for solving discrete-time dynamic programming problems with recursive utility. Dynamic programming with recursive utility is challenging because nonlinear certainty equivalent appears in the Bellman equation and the first-order optimality conditions but is difficult to evaluate. By introducing a separate neural network to represent the certainty equivalent, CEFOL enables the exploitation of the Bellman and model-specific first-order optimality conditions. In addition to certainty equivalent, CEFOL also uses neural networks to learn the value functions, policy functions, and Lagrange multipliers by using model-specific first-order conditions to construct residuals for minimization. By using first-order and KKT residuals to learn the policy, CEFOL directly accommodates general equality and inequality constraints on the controls, including occasionally binding constraints, without requiring penalty functions or problem-specific reformulations. We apply the algorithm to risk-sensitive and Epstein--Zin consumption-saving problems, a small-noise robust-control problem, and a DSGE model with recursive preferences and stochastic volatility. Across these applications, out-of-sample Bellman diagnostics and model-specific optimality residuals, including Euler or first-order residuals where applicable, are generally of order 1.0e-4 to 1.0e-3 over the relevant state regions, with larger values mainly near binding constraints, and the learned value and policy functions closely match VFI benchmarks when available. The CEFOL algorithm also works for dynamic programming problems with expected utility, as expected utility is a special case of recursive utility.
We propose the first deep learning algorithm, the Certainty Equivalent Learning (CEL) algorithm, for solving high-dimensional discrete-time dynamic programming problems with recursive utility. Dynamic programming with recursive utility is numerically challenging because the recursive utility does not have an explicit representation and the Bellman equation contains a certainty equivalent that is difficult to evaluate. The CEL algorithm learns this certainty-equivalent value directly with neural networks and jointly approximates value functions, policy functions, and certainty-equivalent functions. The CEL algorithm is mesh-free and simulation-based, allowing high-dimensional state and control spaces, and does not rely on Euler equations, first-order conditions, or differentiability of the state transition function. The CEL algorithm also works for dynamic programming problems with expected utility as expected utility is a special case of recursive utility. We apply the CEL to discounted linear exponential quadratic Gaussian control, small-noise robust control, Epstein-Zin DSGE, and multivariate strategic asset allocation problems. Compared with closed-form and VFI-based benchmarks, the CEL delivers accurate value and policy approximations, remains effective in high-dimensional problems, achieves accuracy comparable to VFI in the small-noise robust-control case, and produces out-of-sample Bellman errors and Euler or first-order residuals that are in the range from 1.0e-4 to 1.0e-3 for most problems.
Manon Reusens, Sofie Goethals, David Martenscs.AI econ.GN
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents that make consumption decisions on behalf of users. This shift raises fundamental questions for consumer theory, which has traditionally modeled humans as the primary decision-makers. In this paper, we introduce LLM Consumer Behavior Theory, a new field of study concerned with analyzing consumer behavior in agentic markets. Drawing on classical and behavioral economics alongside recent advances in Natural Language Processing, we formalize how human preferences are reflected and acted upon by LLM-based agents, and how agent-level decisions aggregate into market demand. We unify previously fragmented literature on LLM decision-making, human behavior simulation, and preference elicitation under a common economic lens, highlighting where assumptions, such as rationality and heterogeneity, may fail in agentic markets. Rather than providing empirical validation, this paper outlines the scope of LLM consumer behavior and identifies open research questions related to alignment, preference representation, and market dynamics.
A long-standing challenge in economics lies not in the lack of intuition, but in the difficulty of translating intuitive insights into verifiable research. To address this challenge, we introduce AgentEconomist, an end-to-end interactive system designed to translate abstract intuitions into executable computational experiments. Grounded in a domain-specific knowledge base covering over 13,000 high-quality academic papers, the system employs a modular multi-stage architecture. Specifically, the Idea Development Stage generates literature-grounded hypotheses, the Experimental Design Stage configures simulator-aligned experimental parameters and protocols, and the Experimental Execution Stage runs experiments and returns structured analyses. Together, these stages form a human-in-the-loop, iterative workflow that translates economic intuitions into executable computational experiments. Through extensive experiments involving human expert evaluation and large language models (LLMs) as judges, we show that the system generates research ideas with stronger literature grounding and higher novelty and insight than state-of-the-art generic LLMs. Overall, AgentEconomist adopts a human-AI collaboration paradigm that enables researchers to focus on high-level intuitions, while delegating the labor-intensive processes of translation and computational execution to agents.