ERC FUNDED PROJECTS

ACADEMIA proposes a pioneering study of a neglected corpus of manuscripts stemming from the practice of quodlibetal debates held at Faculties of Arts of European universities, flourishing from the 14th to the early 16th century. As prescribed by the university statutes, dozens of professors participated periodically in these unique collective works of the Middle Ages, which encompassed all the disciplines pursued at the university, from logic to medicine to theology. The PI hypothesises that the professors presented at the hitherto mostly ignored quodlibets their recent scientific innovations, which they then published in the first collective volumes of European academia. The PI thus proposes a novel theoretical framework for understanding the quodlibets: they stand at the origin of the modern concept of science as a collective intellectual enterprise, similar to modern conferences and the subsequent dissemination of results. This makes them and their written form critical for understanding European intellectual and scientific traditions, both past and present. ACADEMIA’s ambition is to establish the corpus of these debates as a new field of study through an extensive examination of manuscripts, thus filling a substantial gap, radically extending the fields of the history of universities and intellectual history, and reconstructing the roots of the modern practice of fostering collective science. A complex analysis of the corpus will bring about a substantial change in our understanding of medieval practices of the production and sharing of knowledge. Aiming to examine the quodlibets as a phenomenon successively interconnecting European intellectual space, ACADEMIA focuses on fourteen universities at which the PI has identified the tradition so far and on their mutual relations and development. ACADEMIA employs an interdisciplinary team and an innovative combination of approaches from history, codicology, palaeography, philology, hermeneutics and Digital Humanities.

1 260 485 €

Start date: 2021-07-01, End date: 2026-06-30

Mitochondria are often referred to as the “power houses” of eukaryotic cells. All eukaryotes were thought to have mitochondria of some form until 2016, when the first eukaryote thriving without mitochondria was discovered by our laboratory – a flagellate Monocercomonoides. Understanding cellular functions of these cells, which represent a new functional type of eukaryotes, and understanding the circumstances of the unique event of mitochondrial loss are motivations for this proposal. The first objective focuses on the cell physiology. We will perform a metabolomic study revealing major metabolic pathways and concentrate further on elucidating its unique system of iron-sulphur cluster assembly. In the second objective, we will investigate in details the unique case of mitochondrial loss. We will examine two additional potentially amitochondriate lineages by means of genomics and transcriptomics, conduct experiments simulating the moments of mitochondrial loss and try to induce the mitochondrial loss in vitro by knocking out or down genes for mitochondrial biogenesis. We have chosen Giardia intestinalis and Entamoeba histolytica as models for the latter experiments, because their mitochondria are already reduced to minimalistic “mitosomes” and because some genetic tools are already available for them. Successful mitochondrial knock-outs would enable us to study mitochondrial loss in ‘real time’ and in vivo. In the third objective, we will focus on transforming Monocercomonoides into a tractable laboratory model by developing methods of axenic cultivation and genetic manipulation. This will open new possibilities in the studies of this organism and create a cell culture representing an amitochondriate model for cell biological studies enabling the dissection of mitochondrial effects from those of other compartments. The team is composed of the laboratory of PI and eight invited experts and we hope it has the ability to address these challenging questions.

1 935 500 €

Start date: 2018-05-01, End date: 2023-04-30

This proposal outlines an agenda that aims to improve our understanding of economies with inattentive agents. Attention to detail, not only to current news, but also to how the world works in general, is central to how we interact with the environment. In the first part of the agenda, we will study how agents come up with the simplified mental models they use in their decision-making. The aim is to provide a new alternative to rational expectations. We will address the question of endogenous model uncertainty by sidestepping the largely statistical nature of previous work. Our agents learn about a model directly, i.e., all information on the details of the correct model is readily available. The envisioned implications can speak to issues such as the expectations formation and formation of narratives, polarization of opinions, and demand for public policy. In the second part, we will study how a government optimally intervenes in markets if it finds it costly to get the necessary information. On one hand, a government does not possess the local information of decentralized markets. On the other, markets on their own often generate suboptimal social outcomes. We will explore what information the government should collect, how to use it for regulation, and when instead it should leave markets unaffected. In the third part, we will leverage recent theories of attention allocation and use uniquely detailed data on attention and treatment choices by hospital personnel (including physicians and nurses). This will allow us to explore in more detail than before what theories describe realistic choices well. Moreover, we will eventually aim at a very practical goal: how to help clinicians decrease their cognitive load and improve medical choices.

1 162 664 €

Start date: 2021-04-01, End date: 2026-03-31

BEHAVFRICTIONS will use novel models focussing on information-processing frictions to explain choice patterns described in behavioral economics and psychology. The proposed research will provide microfoundations that are essential for (i) identification of stable preferences, (ii) counterfactual predictions, and (iii) normative conclusions. (i) Agents who face information-processing costs must trade the precision of choice against information costs. Their behavior thus reflects both their stable preferences and the context-dependent procedures that manage their errors stemming from imperfect information processing. In the absence of micro-founded models, the two drivers of the behavior are difficult to disentangle for outside observers. In some pillars of the proposal, the agents follow choice rules that closely resemble logit rules used in structural estimation. This will allow me to reinterpret the structural estimation fits to choice data and to make a distinction between the stable preferences and frictions. (ii) Such a distinction is important in counterfactual policy analysis because the second-best decision procedures that manage the errors in choice are affected by the analysed policy. Incorporation of the information-processing frictions into existing empirical methods will improve our ability to predict effects of the policies. (iii) My preliminary results suggest that when an agent is prone to committing errors, biases--such as overconfidence, confirmatory bias, or perception biases known from prospect theory--arise under second-best strategies. By providing the link between the agent's environment and the second-best distribution of the perception errors, my models will delineate environments in which these biases shield the agents from the most costly mistakes from environments in which the biases turn into maladaptations. The distinction will inform the normative debate on debiasing.

1 321 488 €

Start date: 2018-06-01, End date: 2023-05-31