Estimating DSGE-Model-Consistent Trends for Use in Forecasting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The workhorse DSGE model used for monetary policy evaluation is designed to capture business cycle fluctuations in an optimization-based format. It is commonplace to log-linearize models and express them with variables in deviation-from-steady-state format. Structural parameters are either calibrated, or estimated using data pre-filtered to extract trends. Such procedures treat past and future trends as fully known by all economic agents or, at least, as independent of cyclical behaviour. With such a setup, in a forecasting environment it seems natural to add forecasts from DSGE models to trend forecasts. While this may be an intuitive starting point, efficiency can be improved in multiple dimensions. Ideally, behaviour of trends and cycles should be jointly modeled. However, for computational reasons it may not be feasible to do so, particularly with medium- or large-scale models. Nevertheless, marginal improvements on the standard framework can still be made. First, pre-filtering of data can be amended to incorporate structural links between the various trends that are implied by the economic theory on which the model is based, improving the efficiency of trend estimates. Second, forecast efficiency can be improved by building a forecast model for model-consistent trends. Third, decomposition of shocks into permanent and transitory components can be endogenized to also be model-consistent. This paper proposes a unified framework for introducing these improvements. Application of the methodology validates the existence of considerable deviations between trends used for detrending data prior to structural parameter estimation and model-consistent estimates of trends, implying the potential for efficiency gains in forecasting. Such deviations also provide information on aspects of the model that are least coherent with the data, possibly indicating model misspecification. Additionally, the framework provides a structure for examining cyclical responses to trend shocks, among other extensions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".