{"args":{},"checks":[{"abs_tol":null,"bind":"any","column":null,"failure_class":null,"field":"value","interval":false,"key":null,"kind":"answer_backed","min_lre":null,"note":"every number in the answer was stated by a tool call","open_interval":false,"rel_tol":null,"required":true,"source_id":null,"table":null,"tool":null,"value":null,"weight":1.0,"where":null},{"abs_tol":null,"bind":"answer_call","column":null,"failure_class":null,"field":"value","interval":false,"key":null,"kind":"answer_figure_close","min_lre":null,"note":"CauSciBench effect accuracy: |answer figure \u2212 gold| \u2264 5% of |gold|","open_interval":false,"rel_tol":0.05,"required":true,"source_id":"causcibench_real.gold.q079","table":null,"tool":null,"value":-0.021,"weight":1.0,"where":null}],"datasets":{"panagopoulos_timing":{"columns":null,"description":"The dataset consists of 25,000 registered voters in Rochester, New York, who were part of a randomized field experiment during the November 2005 municipal elections. Voters were randomly assigned to one of four groups: a phone reminder call scheduled for 4 weeks before Election Day, 2 weeks before, 3 days before, or a control group that received no call. The calls were nonpartisan get-out-the-vote reminders, delivered using standardized scripts. The unit of observation is the individual registered voter, and only those appearing on the official registration list were included. The main outcome is voter turnout in the 2005 election, while additional measures capture past voting history, party registration, demographics, and a predicted propensity to vote. The dataset also records whether each assigned reminder call was actually completed, allowing for comparison between group assignment and the reality of who was contacted.\n\nData variables:\nvtr_gen01: Voted (2001)\nvtr_gen03: Voted (2003)\nvtr_gen05: Outcome: Voted 2005\ntreated: Successfully contacted\nfour_weeks: Experimental group: Called 4 weeks before election\ntwo_weeks: Experimental group: Called 2 weeks before election\nthree_days: Experimental group: Called 3 days before election\ncontrol: Experimental group: Control, i.e., did not receive any calls\ndemocrat: Registered Democrat\nrepublican: Registered Republican\nunenrolled: Unaffiliated\nother_party: Other party registration\nage: Age (years)\nage_squared: Age squared\ncontacted_4weeks: Successfully contacted: 4 weeks\ncontacted_2weeks: Successfully contacted: 2 weeks\ncontacted_3days: Successfully contacted: 3 days\nvote_prop: Predicted vote propensity\nuse: Subject included\nid: Subject ID","file_sha256":"37ac4466ad26ac40012073e833298d7e3f2f8e8fbe8eb1fa90268ec2e1181ad7","format":"csv","frame_sha256":null,"generator":null,"kind":"file","licence":"CC0 1.0 (CauSciBench data/README.md); original source https://dataverse.yale.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.60600/YU/STKD55","member":null,"object":null,"params":{},"path":null,"read_kw":{},"records":null,"role":"agent","sha256":"37ac4466ad26ac40012073e833298d7e3f2f8e8fbe8eb1fa90268ec2e1181ad7","transforms":[],"url":"https://huggingface.co/datasets/causal-nlp/causcibench/resolve/d8aca99042e0bf1d73120a9dc1b65d4079fa1c3a/csv_files/realdata/panagopoulos_timing.csv"}},"difficulty":"M","id":"causcibench_real.q079","level":"T2","meta":{"agent_reach":{"blocked_by":["needs_spec:sample","needs_spec:subgroup"],"dtypes":{"panagopoulos_timing":{"age":"float64","age_squared":"float64","contacted_4weeks":"int64","democrat":"int64","four_weeks":"int64","other_party":"int64","republican":"int64","unenrolled":"int64","vtr_gen01":"int64","vtr_gen03":"int64","vtr_gen05":"int64"}},"named":{"outcome":["vtr_gen05"],"treatment":["contacted_4weeks"]},"reachable":false,"rule":"magi_bench.reach/1"},"answer_format":{"figure_transform":"identity","round_to":null,"unit_scale":1.0},"cluster":"paper:Timing is everything? Primacy and recency effects in voter mobilization campaigns","gold":{"effect":-0.021,"effect_as_stored":"-0.021","is_significant":0,"source_id":"causcibench_real.gold.q079","std_error":0.021,"std_error_as_stored":"0.021"},"headline_keys":{"infer.iv_2sls":["coef.contacted_4weeks"]},"metadata":{"control_variables":"democrat,republican,unenrolled,other_party,age,age_squared,vtr_gen01,vtr_gen03","dataset_path":"data/csv_files/realdata/panagopoulos_timing.csv","effect":-0.021,"id":79,"instrument_var":"four_weeks","interaction_var":null,"is_rct":true,"is_significant":0,"method":"iv","name":"Timing is everything? Primacy and recency effects in voter mobilization campaigns","outcome_var":"vtr_gen05","running_var":null,"state_var":null,"std_error":0.021,"temporal_var":null,"treatment_var":"contacted_4weeks"},"naive":{"dataset":"panagopoulos_timing","treatment":"contacted_4weeks","y":"vtr_gen05"},"name":"Timing is everything? Primacy and recency effects in voter mobilization campaigns","native_id":79,"outcome":"vtr_gen05","pin":{"data_repo":"causal-nlp/causcibench","data_revision":"d8aca99042e0bf1d73120a9dc1b65d4079fa1c3a","repo":"causalNLP/CauSciBench","revision":"d9bb43a2d90f261978cc5ac0b628c0484f6e8956"},"precision_limited":false,"reference":{"cite":1,"steps":[{"args":{"dataset":"panagopoulos_timing","endog":["contacted_4weeks"],"exog":["democrat","republican","unenrolled","other_party","age","age_squared","vtr_gen01","vtr_gen03"],"instruments":["four_weeks"],"y":"vtr_gen05"},"tool":"infer.iv_2sls","why":"causcibench_metadata_rule/1: iv"}]},"reference_notes":["the item's text fixes a sample the metadata rule does not apply","the item's text fixes a subgroup the metadata rule does not apply"],"reference_path":{"calls":[{"args":{"dataset":"panagopoulos_timing","endog":["contacted_4weeks"],"exog":["democrat","republican","unenrolled","other_party","age","age_squared","vtr_gen01","vtr_gen03"],"instruments":["four_weeks"],"y":"vtr_gen05"},"tool":"infer.iv_2sls"}],"needs":["needs_spec:sample","needs_spec:subgroup"],"provenance":"metadata_rule","quotes":{"sample":"use: Subject included","subgroup":"Among low-propensity voters, defined as those with a voting propensity of at most 0.68"},"reference_datasets":[],"source_id":null},"reference_rule":"causcibench_metadata_rule/1","source":"causcibench","treatment":"contacted_4weeks"},"question":"Among low-propensity voters, defined as those with a voting propensity of at most 0.68, what is the effect of receiving a get-out-the-vote phone call four weeks prior to the election on turnout?","requires":[],"runner":null,"sources":["causcibench_real.gold.q079"],"split":"public","suite":"causcibench_real","tags":["econ-bench","external","causcibench","method:iv"],"target":"agent","tool":null,"truth":"CauSciBench real_input.json @ d9bb43a, id 79: effect -0.021"}