tegwick
a9ca0adfcf
Batch evaluation of all 988 entities via OpenRouter. 984 succeeded on first pass; 3 failed (network errors). eval-summary --update-metrics written with per_entity_mean=3.9556. Viability dashboard: 6/6 PASS redundancy_ratio 0.0061 (max 0.10) coverage_ratio 0.6190 (min 0.40) coherence_comps 0.0000 (max 3) consistency_cycles 0.0000 (max 0) granularity_entropy 2.6748 (min 1.0) per_entity_mean 3.9556 (min 3.5) Dimension breakdown (mean across 985 entities): definition_precision 3.62 source_grounding 4.36 domain_placement 4.56 vsm_relevance 3.31 explanatory_value 3.94 Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
63 lines
3.4 KiB
Markdown
63 lines
3.4 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
entity_slug: mercantile_jealousy
|
|
evaluator: null
|
|
evaluated_at: '2026-02-23T05:50:31.926078'
|
|
overall_score: 4.4
|
|
scores:
|
|
- name: definition_precision
|
|
value: 4.0
|
|
max_value: 5.0
|
|
rationale: The definition clearly distinguishes mercantile jealousy as competitive
|
|
hostility between merchants of different nations that leads to advocacy for protective
|
|
measures. It avoids circularity and captures a specific behavioral pattern rather
|
|
than a vague concept.
|
|
- name: source_grounding
|
|
value: 5.0
|
|
max_value: 5.0
|
|
rationale: This concept is directly grounded in Smith's analysis in Book IV, Chapter
|
|
3, where he explicitly discusses how merchants' competitive fears and hostilities
|
|
toward foreign rivals drive their support for trade restrictions. Smith uses this
|
|
psychological mechanism to explain protectionist advocacy.
|
|
- name: domain_placement
|
|
value: 5.0
|
|
max_value: 5.0
|
|
rationale: The "Regulation" domain is perfectly appropriate since mercantile jealousy
|
|
is presented as a driving force behind regulatory capture and trade restrictions.
|
|
This psychological factor directly explains the genesis of protective regulations.
|
|
- name: vsm_relevance
|
|
value: 3.0
|
|
max_value: 5.0
|
|
rationale: This entity has moderate VSM relevance, potentially mapping to S4 (intelligence/environmental
|
|
adaptation) as it represents how economic actors perceive and respond to competitive
|
|
threats. However, it's more of a behavioral driver than a structural system component.
|
|
- name: explanatory_value
|
|
value: 5.0
|
|
max_value: 5.0
|
|
rationale: This entity provides excellent explanatory power by identifying the psychological
|
|
mechanism that connects individual merchant interests to broader protectionist
|
|
policies. It illuminates how private competitive fears translate into public policy
|
|
advocacy, explaining a key dynamic in Smith's critique of mercantilism.
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Evaluation: Mercantile Jealousy
|
|
|
|
## definition_precision — 4.0 / 5.0
|
|
|
|
The definition clearly distinguishes mercantile jealousy as competitive hostility between merchants of different nations that leads to advocacy for protective measures. It avoids circularity and captures a specific behavioral pattern rather than a vague concept.
|
|
|
|
## source_grounding — 5.0 / 5.0
|
|
|
|
This concept is directly grounded in Smith's analysis in Book IV, Chapter 3, where he explicitly discusses how merchants' competitive fears and hostilities toward foreign rivals drive their support for trade restrictions. Smith uses this psychological mechanism to explain protectionist advocacy.
|
|
|
|
## domain_placement — 5.0 / 5.0
|
|
|
|
The "Regulation" domain is perfectly appropriate since mercantile jealousy is presented as a driving force behind regulatory capture and trade restrictions. This psychological factor directly explains the genesis of protective regulations.
|
|
|
|
## vsm_relevance — 3.0 / 5.0
|
|
|
|
This entity has moderate VSM relevance, potentially mapping to S4 (intelligence/environmental adaptation) as it represents how economic actors perceive and respond to competitive threats. However, it's more of a behavioral driver than a structural system component.
|
|
|
|
## explanatory_value — 5.0 / 5.0
|
|
|
|
This entity provides excellent explanatory power by identifying the psychological mechanism that connects individual merchant interests to broader protectionist policies. It illuminates how private competitive fears translate into public policy advocacy, explaining a key dynamic in Smith's critique of mercantilism.
|