Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au cours des années 1990, les marchés financiers nord-américains ont été marqués par une hausse notable des indices boursiers. De plus, le nombre de ménages qui détiennent des actions a augmenté de façon significative. Si la richesse boursière influence les décisions des consommateurs, la hausse du cours des actions a eu un impact appréciable sur la consommation des ménages ces dernières années. L'objectif de la présente étude est d'examiner la relation entre la valeur des actions et la consommation globale. L'approche utilisée pour estimer cette relation est un modèle à correction d'erreurs, et l'échantillon porte sur des données canadiennes allant du premier trimestre de 1965 au quatrième trimestre de 1998. Les résultats montrent que les fluctuations de la richesse boursière ont un effet significatif (environ 3 % du changement de la valeur des actions) sur la consommation à long terme. Les variations à court terme du prix des actions accélèrent l'ajustement vers l'équilibre de long terme des dépenses des ménages.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".