MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1496964394

Lessons from the Inoue Zaisei and the Takahashi Zaisei

2008· article· zh· W1496964394 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
規久男 岩田

Bibliographic record

Venue學習院大學經濟論集 · 2008
Typearticle
Languagezh
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJapanese History and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeregulationEconomicsRecessionEconomic policyGovernment (linguistics)Interest rateInvestment (military)Fiscal policyFinancial systemEconomyMonetary economicsMarket economyMacroeconomicsPolitical sciencePolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the 1992 recession, the performance of the Japanese economy has been the worst of the developed nations. Japan’s average rate of real economic growth was only 1.1% between 1992 and 2001, compared with 4.0% growth in the 1980s. The comparable figures for Australia, the United States, and the United Kingdom were 3.7%, 3.3%, and 2.6%, respectively. The question is why this poor performance has occurred. A number of hypotheses have emerged, including the inadequacy of fiscal policy, inappropriate monetary policy leading to deflation, the low investment rate following over-investment during the bubble period of the late 1980s and early 1990s, financial disintermediation due to huge nonperforming loans, and a fall in the potential growth rate because of supply-side factors. In an attempt to repair the economy, the then Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi from 1998 until 2000 substantially increased government expenditures and cut both income and corporate taxes. The result was a huge increase in the stock of government bonds. In contrast, for the past three years, the then Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi from 2001 untill 2006 largely reduced government expenditures and tried to improve the supply side of the Japanese economy. Koizumi was confident that regulated and inefficient public enterprises and financial corporations were responsible for Japan’s poor performance in the 1990s. Therefore, he intended to regenerate the Japanese economy by implementing structural reforms, including deregulation and privatization of public enterprises and financial corporations. Such economic reforms were undertaken in developed countries such as the United Kingdom and Australia and are now considered to have improved economic performance. However, we doubt whether the structural reforms succeeded in regenerating the Japanese economy. There had been a large deflationary gap in the Japanese economy since 1998, and it was highly likely that the structural reforms enlarged this gap by raising the potential growth rate. If so, it is less likely that the structual reforms are the cause of the economic recovery since 2002. It should be noted that the developed countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, undertook structural economic reforms when there was an inflationary gap in their economies. Structural reform is an effective economic policy in mitigating an infla-

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0060.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue學習院大學經濟論集Same topicJapanese History and CultureFrench-language works237,207