Here's my take: the paper would say that solving the AD-AD model with a computational technique with specific choices for parameters would not be considered a theoretical contribution.
I think that is an accurate characterization of economics, based on my experience of what 'theoretical' means. Why? When you use a numerical technique (i.e. not a symbolic manipulation) with particular values for the parameters, few would call that theoretical work. They'll call it applied economics.
(Side note: I can't speak from experience if the AD-AS model is usually solved with dynamic programming.)
Here's my take: the paper would say that solving the AD-AD model with a computational technique with specific choices for parameters would not be considered a theoretical contribution.
I think that is an accurate characterization of economics, based on my experience of what 'theoretical' means. Why? When you use a numerical technique (i.e. not a symbolic manipulation) with particular values for the parameters, few would call that theoretical work. They'll call it applied economics.
(Side note: I can't speak from experience if the AD-AS model is usually solved with dynamic programming.)