L’interface est localisée ; les présentations et documents des Skills sont traduits automatiquement par IA dans votre langue. Le code, les commandes, chemins et termes techniques restent en version originale, et le document de l’auteur fait foi.
Explorer les Skills
Développement · SKILL.md

jet-topic-selection

jet-topic-selection

Use when testing whether a project clears the Journal of Economic Theory (JET) scope gate — a rigorous, original theoretical contribution in a core theory area, with empirical/computational work only when firmly grounded in theory.

Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs

Documentation de la Skill

GitHub

name: jet-topic-selection description: Use when testing whether a project clears the Journal of Economic Theory (JET) scope gate — a rigorous, original theoretical contribution in a core theory area, with empirical/computational work only when firmly grounded in theory.

Topic Selection (jet-topic-selection)

When to trigger

  • Deciding whether a result belongs at JET versus a field or empirical journal
  • You have data, an experiment, or a computation and want to know if it can go to JET
  • Choosing which of several results to lead with

The JET scope gate

JET publishes across mechanism design, information economics, decision theory, game theory, matching, market design, political economy, and finance / macroeconomic / monetary theory — broad general theory in one venue, not a subfield niche. The single deciding criterion is a rigorous, original theoretical contribution. Ask three questions:

  1. Is the core deliverable a theorem (or a genuinely new model/characterization)? If the headline is a regression coefficient or a calibration with no new theoretical result, JET is off-fit — regardless of how clean the empirics are.
  2. Is it original and non-trivial? A restatement of a known result, or a special case of an existing theorem, will not clear the desk screen (see jet-review-process).
  3. If there is empirical / experimental / quantitative / computational content, is it firmly grounded in theory? JET admits such work only as the application or test of a theoretical contribution that is itself the paper's point — not as a stand-alone empirical paper.

Decision rule

  • Lead with the theory. State the result you would put in the abstract as a proposition/theorem. If you cannot, the project is not yet a JET paper.
  • Generality vs. tractability. A clean result under transparent assumptions usually beats a more general result that no referee can verify (see jet-identification-strategy).
  • Subfield routing. Name the area early — submissions are routed to the matching editor.

Deliverable-type scope table

Your core deliverableJET verdictIf off-fit, reroute
New characterization / existence / impossibility theorem in a core areain scope — lead with it—
Counterexample overturning a folk presumptionin scope when the presumption matters to a literatureframe the economics of why the presumption mattered
New solution concept or preference axiomatizationin scope; expect heavy scrutiny of the axioms' behavioral content—
Asset-pricing result whose substance is stochastic-analysis machinery (semimartingales, no-arbitrage functional analysis)usually a better fit at a mathematical-finance venue; JET wants the economics of the theoremfinance theory belongs at JET when incentives, information, or equilibrium do the work
Structural estimation / calibration exerciseoff-fit regardless of model qualityempirical or quantitative-macro journals
Market-design algorithm with performance proofsin scope when the theorem is the contributionotherwise an OR/CS venue

Vignette: a matching project at the gate

A team holds (i) a stability-existence theorem for matching with regional constraints, (ii) simulations on synthetic data, and (iii) a policy application. Running the three questions:

  • Q1: yes — the existence theorem is the deliverable; the simulations and policy story are not.
  • Q2: check against the closest constrained-matching theorem before claiming novelty; if the result is a special case of a published substitutes condition, it will not clear the screen.
  • Q3: the simulations only exhibit the constrained core's shape, so they compress into one numbered Example with a script (jet-data-analysis).

Verdict: JET-ready — lead with the theorem, demote the policy narrative to one motivation paragraph, and name "matching / market design" for editor routing.

Lead-result selection when you have several

  • Prefer the result whose assumptions are cleanest to state, even if a sibling result is technically harder — the lead theorem is what the desk screen reads.
  • A characterization beats an existence result as the headline when both are proved; existence can follow as a corollary section.
  • Never lead with the comparative static if the underlying equilibrium object is itself new.

Anti-patterns

  • An applied-micro or finance paper with a token model bolted on
  • A computational exercise with no characterization result behind it
  • A marginal generalization of a published theorem framed as new

Output format

【Core result】<the theorem/characterization in one sentence>
【Scope fit】in-scope theory area: <area> | off-fit: <why>
【Empirical/computational content】none | grounded-in-theory | stand-alone (off-fit)
【Verdict】JET-ready / reframe / send elsewhere → jet-literature-positioning
Skills enregistrées