{ "schemaVersion": "1.6", "slug": "state-contingent-comparability", "title": "State-contingent sovereign debt: payment dominance, exact comparability and implementable bounds", "shortTitle": "Less paid. Still rejected.", "url": "https://evidencepress.org/releases/state-contingent-comparability/", "oneLine": "A duration veto can reject a debt contract that pays less at every date; exact certificates expose the conflict and give sharp payment bounds under declared information.", "abstract": "This candidate studies exact verification and design under a declared three-coordinate sovereign-debt comparability screen. Present value and programme service are affine on each trigger region, while duration gives a quadratic inequality. An explicit construction pays less at every date and passes both endpoint tests yet fails duration throughout the interior; a perturbation makes both endpoints pass strictly. A payment-removal identity characterises when duration respects componentwise reductions. Exact interval methods then give implementable payment bounds under partial information. In a new nonproportional family with unmatched old claims and an oblique trigger, the sharp cap is 25 off-trigger and 110/7 on-trigger, with the binding constraint switching at uplift 75/7. A separate checker reconstructs every certified domain and trigger region from the declared model before checking 48 minima and 252 coefficient identities. These are conditional mathematical results, not an authenticated contract analysis, welfare result, sustainability assessment or country verdict.", "datePublished": "2026-10-15", "dateModified": "2026-10-15", "version": "3.0.0-candidate", "doi": "10.5281/zenodo.23392424", "doiUrl": "https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23392424", "conceptDoi": null, "pdfUrl": "https://zenodo.org/records/23392424/files/state-contingent-comparability-v3.pdf", "altPdfUrl": "https://github.com/ipitchford/state-contingent-comparability/releases/download/v3.0.0-candidate/state-contingent-comparability-v3.pdf", "altPdfLabel": null, "zenodoUrl": "https://zenodo.org/records/23392424", "repoUrl": "https://github.com/ipitchford/state-contingent-comparability", "releaseUrl": "https://github.com/ipitchford/state-contingent-comparability/releases/tag/v3.0.0-candidate", "markdownUrl": "https://evidencepress.org/releases/state-contingent-comparability/index.md", "bibtexUrl": "https://evidencepress.org/releases/state-contingent-comparability/cite.bib", "audioUrl": "https://evidencepress.org/assets/audio/state-contingent-comparability.mp3", "imageUrl": "https://evidencepress.org/assets/og/state-contingent-comparability.png?v=3cddc85e39", "coverArtUrl": "https://evidencepress.org/assets/art/state-contingent-comparability.svg?v=296fe67389", "media": [ { "type": "audio", "url": "https://evidencepress.org/assets/audio/state-contingent-comparability.mp3", "name": "Audio briefing — Less paid. Still rejected.", "description": "Synthetic explanation of the duration conflict, sharp bounds and application boundary; not additional scientific evidence.", "transcriptUrl": "https://evidencepress.org/assets/audio/state-contingent-comparability.txt" } ], "authors": [ "Anonymous" ], "license": "CC0-1.0", "status": "unrefereed-candidate", "verification": { "peerReviewed": false, "independentlyReproduced": false, "formallyVerified": false, "internallyReplayed": true, "detail": "Anonymous, AI-assisted and unrefereed. Exact replay, implementation-diverse checking and adversarial negative controls establish their stated encoded claims only. No authenticated legal instrument, institutional acceptance rule, empirical calibration, welfare ranking, debt-sustainability conclusion, exhaustive priority assessment, external specialist review or editorial peer review is established." }, "assurance": [ { "dimension": "availability", "label": "Availability and archiving", "question": "Is the evidence package publicly retrievable from an archive under a persistent identifier?", "state": "passed", "evidenceUrl": "https://zenodo.org/records/23392424", "note": "Version-bound GitHub and Zenodo assets passed provider-checksum, size and full-download byte-parity readback on 15 October 2026." }, { "dimension": "internalReplay", "label": "Internal replay", "question": "Does the producer’s own pipeline reproduce the stated result from the archived package?", "state": "passed", "note": "Normal and optimised producer, checker and regression runs pass. The checker reconstructs domains and trigger ownership from declared model data and detects the shortened-domain negative control.", "evidenceUrl": "https://github.com/ipitchford/state-contingent-comparability/blob/v3.0.0-candidate/README.md" }, { "dimension": "independentRerun", "label": "Independent rerun", "question": "Has someone else run the supplied implementation and obtained the stated result?", "state": "not-assessed", "note": "No unaffiliated end-to-end rerun is established." }, { "dimension": "independentReimplementation", "label": "Independent reimplementation", "question": "Has someone else reached the result from an independent implementation?", "state": "not-assessed", "note": "The checker is implementation-diverse but was produced in the coordinated revision workflow, so it is not unaffiliated reimplementation." }, { "dimension": "formalVerification", "label": "Formal verification", "question": "Is a formalised statement machine-checked, and over which trusted base?", "state": "not-assessed", "note": "No proof-assistant formalisation is established." }, { "dimension": "specialistReview", "label": "Specialist review", "question": "Has a domain specialist assessed the argument?", "state": "not-assessed", "note": "Automated and model-mediated reviews do not establish external specialist review." }, { "dimension": "editorialPeerReview", "label": "Editorial peer review", "question": "Has a journal or venue run peer review to a decision?", "state": "not-assessed", "note": "No external editorial peer-review decision is established." }, { "dimension": "dataEnvironmentReproducibility", "label": "Data and environment reproducibility", "question": "Are data and computational environment pinned well enough to rebuild?", "state": "passed", "evidenceUrl": "https://github.com/ipitchford/state-contingent-comparability/blob/v3.0.0-candidate/ENVIRONMENT.txt", "note": "The exact financial checks require only Python 3.10 or later and the standard library; fresh-extraction replay is recorded separately. Figure and document rebuilding has additional declared dependencies." } ], "provenance": { "aiGenerated": true, "aiAssisted": true, "generatedBy": [ "AI-assisted research and revision workflow", "OpenAI Codex: exact checking, release and media preparation" ], "humanRole": "Publication authority; no human mathematical contribution asserted.", "reviewStatus": "Supplied automated review plus coordinated exact and adversarial checking; external human specialist review is not established." }, "attributionBoundary": null, "problem": null, "orderedProductAverage": null, "corrections": [], "publicCorrections": [], "publicCorrectionIndexes": null, "pageStructureVersion": "2.0", "pageStructureVariant": "canonical-theorem", "pageStructureWaivers": [], "recordMaturity": "current", "metadataProvenance": "Page based on the public, self-contained version-3 manuscript, exact model inputs, implementation-diverse low-dimensional checker and reproducible release artifacts. Private review material is nonessential provenance only: every scientific premise and executable input needed by a reader is included in the public package. GitHub commit 2b95360ae56c80d970d2b72ab72efba99c689672, DOI 10.5281/zenodo.23392424 and full-download byte parity were confirmed on 15 October 2026.", "grandfatheredAtSchemaVersion": null, "keywords": [ "sovereign debt", "state-contingent debt", "comparability of treatment", "duration", "robust optimisation", "partial information", "exact certificates" ], "keyResults": [ "A candidate cash flow can be componentwise smaller than the reference, pass both endpoint duration tests strictly, and still fail a separate duration veto at interior states.", "For the declared piecewise-affine model, exact verification reduces on each reachable trigger region to two affine inequalities and one quadratic inequality, with finite facewise certificates.", "A nonproportional oblique-trigger family has sharp payment caps 25 and 110/7 in its two regions; duration becomes binding exactly when the uplift exceeds 75/7." ], "reviews": [], "evidencePackage": "Self-contained written proofs and exact rational code. The producer and an implementation-diverse checker reconstruct the declared inputs separately. The checker rebuilds 16 model domains and 10 trigger regions from source data, verifies 48 exact minima, 252 coefficient-determining identities and two sharp scalar intervals, and rejects a self-consistent shortened-domain mutation. Normal and optimised Python runs pass. These are producer-coordinated checks, not unaffiliated reproduction, proof-assistant verification or external peer review.", "openProblems": [], "mathObjects": [], "relatedWorks": [ { "citation": "Paris Club. Methodology: Comparability of treatment. The public methodology supplies the institutional accounting context and permits substitution among indicators; it does not define the paper's separate three-veto screen.", "url": "https://clubdeparis.org/en/sites/clubdeparis/accueil/club-de-paris/methodologie.html", "doi": null }, { "citation": "International Monetary Fund (2017). State-contingent debt instruments for sovereigns. Antecedent discussion of triggers, caps, floors and implementation constraints.", "url": "https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/pp/pp032317state-contingent-debt-instruments-for-sovereigns.pdf", "doi": null }, { "citation": "Ben-Tal, Goryashko, Guslitzer and Nemirovski (2004). Adjustable robust solutions of uncertain linear programs. Antecedent for decisions constrained by what is known when they are chosen.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10107-003-0454-y", "doi": "10.1007/s10107-003-0454-y" }, { "citation": "Powell (2026). Comparability of treatment: Where do we stand? Related discussion of strict comparability, creditor heterogeneity and incentives; its setting is not the same mathematical screen.", "url": "https://www.cgdev.org/sites/default/files/comparability-treatment-where-do-we-stand.pdf", "doi": null } ], "claimAssurance": null, "operatingModel": { "version": "1.0", "workId": "ep-work:state-contingent-comparability", "attemptIds": [ "ep-attempt:state-contingent-comparability-publication" ], "aims": [ "science" ], "artifactRoles": [ "research-output", "method-demonstration", "evidence-assessment", "communication" ], "lineageId": null, "accelerationPrimitives": [ "identification-gate", "certificate-first", "partial-identification", "certified-decision-margin", "adversarial-controls", "assurance-vector", "agent-readable-research-object" ], "decisionObject": { "type": "identified-set", "description": "Sharp statewise and information-constrained payment intervals under a fully declared comparability rule.", "scope": "Constructed cash flows, positive declared discounts and piecewise-affine trigger systems; not authenticated contracts or an institutional recommendation." }, "bottleneckTargeted": [ "assurance", "publication" ], "semanticBridge": { "state": "explicit", "description": "Declared cash-flow maps and trigger ownership determine reachable regions; exact present-value, programme-service and duration formulas then define the acceptance set. Information classes intersect statewise payment intervals before a commitment is made.", "remainingRisks": [ "The three-coordinate acceptance screen is stipulated and is narrower than institutional comparability judgements.", "Constructed examples and public methodology do not authenticate a real contract or identify institutional preferences.", "External specialist review, unaffiliated reproduction and exhaustive priority assessment remain absent." ] }, "humanJudgmentGates": [ "The user authorises publication; any application to a live restructuring requires authenticated instruments, institutional rules and separate legal, economic and welfare judgement." ], "parentLinks": [], "assuranceTarget": { "dimensions": [ "independentRerun", "specialistReview", "semanticValidation" ], "nextAction": "Independently reconstruct the duration-removal theorem, oblique-trigger family and input-to-domain bridge, then test a fully authenticated decision rule on a public contract corpus.", "claimCeiling": "Unrefereed conditional mathematics and exact constructed examples; no verified institutional, welfare, country, policy or priority conclusion." }, "impactClaims": [ { "id": "state-contingent-comparability-science-no-impact", "aim": "science", "outcome": "Inspectable exact diagnostics for a declared comparability screen", "setting": "Producer-coordinated theoretical study", "status": "NO_IMPACT_EVIDENCE", "designClass": "none", "comparator": "None.", "estimand": "No measured research acceleration, institutional adoption, welfare effect or policy outcome.", "evidenceRefs": [], "registeredDesignRef": null, "independentAssessment": null } ] }, "researchMetrics": { "schemaVersion": "1.0", "policyUrl": "https://evidencepress.org/api/research-metrics-policy.json", "outcomePolicyUrl": "https://evidencepress.org/api/v2/research-metrics-policy.json", "workLedgerUrl": "https://evidencepress.org/api/work-ledger.json", "claimCeiling": "These records describe scoped workflow inputs and outcomes. They support calibration and reference-class construction, but do not by themselves establish research acceleration, theorem correctness, novelty, independent assurance or impact.", "attempts": [ { "attemptId": "ep-attempt:state-contingent-comparability-publication", "status": "published", "resultClass": "positive", "metrics": { "schemaVersion": "1.0", "measurementScope": "assurance-through-publication", "scopeBoundary": "Remaining adversarial review, frozen-package gate, provider publication, communication assets, two guarded site cycles and exact public readback after this registration; earlier discovery and revision are excluded.", "forecast": { "frozenAt": "2026-10-15T10:23:54Z", "procedureClass": "remaining-full-candidate-publication", "targetOutcome": "Complete exact candidate publication without promoting scientific assurance beyond the evidence.", "expectedActiveMinutes": 120, "plausibleLowMinutes": 80, "plausibleHighMinutes": 210, "expectedUnattendedWaitMinutes": 30, "referenceClass": { "label": "Remaining Evidence Press candidate publication stages", "sampleSize": 0, "basis": "Procedural estimate, not a calibrated benchmark." }, "fermiComponents": [ { "component": "Frozen assurance, provider publication, media, two guarded site cycles and readback", "count": 1, "lowMinutesPerUnit": 80, "centralMinutesPerUnit": 120, "highMinutesPerUnit": 210, "basis": "The scientific revision is substantially complete, but no archive, provider or canonical-delivery gate is waived." } ], "probabilityPositiveSignal": 0.95, "probabilityTargetClosure": 0.85, "probabilityHorizonMinutes": 360, "assumptions": [ "No load-bearing defect is found in the pending adversarial review.", "GitHub, Zenodo, OpenAI TTS and the Evidence Press deployment route remain available." ], "reforecastTriggers": [ "A load-bearing mathematical defect, provider outage or exact-byte mismatch materially changes the remaining work." ], "stopRule": "Complete every mandatory gate or retain a precise unresolved blocker; do not weaken assurance to meet the forecast." }, "outcome": { "status": "unavailable", "policyVersion": "2.0", "recordedAt": "2026-10-15T12:12:36Z", "reason": "The publication target is recorded by the terminal status and canonical readback, but the complete v2 research-performance outcome cannot be computed without inventing uninstrumented effort, wait, rework, run and token counters.", "missingFields": [ { "field": "calendarElapsedMinutes", "reason": "The endpoint clock is known, but the registered interval excludes earlier revision work and includes provider and CI waits, so it is not recorded as a comparable research-performance duration." }, { "field": "activeAgentMinutes", "reason": "Active agent time was not prospectively instrumented and is not reconstructed from wall-clock time." }, { "field": "unattendedWaitMinutes", "reason": "Provider, CI and deployment waiting time was not separately instrumented." }, { "field": "blockedMinutes", "reason": "Blocked time was not separately instrumented." }, { "field": "reworkMinutes", "reason": "Revision and repair time was not separately instrumented." }, { "field": "agentRuns", "reason": "A complete prospectively counted run total was not captured." }, { "field": "maxParallelAgents", "reason": "Parallel-agent occupancy was not prospectively instrumented." }, { "field": "modelTurns", "reason": "A complete cross-model turn count was not captured." }, { "field": "researchCycles", "reason": "Positive, negative and inconclusive research cycles were not prospectively classified." }, { "field": "falsificationGatesRun", "reason": "Many exact and adversarial gates ran, but no complete prospective counter was frozen." }, { "field": "candidateArchitecturesTested", "reason": "The publication attempt did not prospectively count candidate architectures." }, { "field": "candidateArchitecturesRejected", "reason": "The publication attempt did not prospectively count rejected candidate architectures." }, { "field": "substantiveReviewRounds", "reason": "The supplied review and later adversarial pass are documented, but a complete prospective review-round counter was not frozen." }, { "field": "p0Findings", "reason": "Findings were resolved as scholarly and release defects rather than prospectively classified by P0 severity." }, { "field": "p1Findings", "reason": "Findings were resolved as scholarly and release defects rather than prospectively classified by P1 severity." }, { "field": "prepublicationClaimCorrections", "reason": "A complete prospective claim-correction counter was not frozen." }, { "field": "resultState", "reason": "The scientific result class is recorded separately as positive; the complete calibrated metrics outcome is unavailable." }, { "field": "positiveSignalObserved", "reason": "Publication delivery is verified, but no workflow-comparison estimand was registered from which to infer a positive performance signal." }, { "field": "targetReached", "reason": "The publication target is visibly reached in the status record, but this metrics field is not backfilled inside an otherwise unavailable outcome." }, { "field": "forecastErrorMinutes", "reason": "Comparable active-effort duration is unavailable, so forecast error cannot be computed." }, { "field": "forecastRatio", "reason": "Comparable active-effort duration is unavailable, so a forecast ratio cannot be computed." }, { "field": "withinForecastInterval", "reason": "Comparable active-effort duration is unavailable, so interval calibration cannot be assessed." }, { "field": "activeHumanMinutes", "reason": "Human active time was not prospectively instrumented." }, { "field": "computeMinutes", "reason": "Aggregate compute time across local checks, hosted CI and provider work was not prospectively instrumented." }, { "field": "deduplicatedModelTokens", "reason": "Cross-model token telemetry was not captured in a deduplicated form." }, { "field": "uncachedInputTokens", "reason": "Uncached input-token telemetry was not captured across models and providers." } ], "calibration": null } }, "missingnessReason": null } ] } }