MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1523888214 · doi:10.1111/1468-2362.00049

Monetary Policy Implementation: Past, Present and Future – Will Electronic Money Lead to the Eventual Demise of Central Banking?

2000· article· en· W1523888214 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Finance · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBanking stability, regulation, efficiency
Canadian institutionsBank of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemiseSettlement (finance)EconomicsMonetary policyCentral bankMonetary economicsInterest rateMonetary baseOpen market operationInflation (cosmology)Reserve requirementMoney creationOfficial cash rateQuantitative easingBusinessBank rateFinancePayment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the ways in which central banks influence the very short‐term interest rate in regimes with and without reserve requirements. It then examines the implications for monetary policy implementation of the spread of electronic money and the potential for other mechanisms to compete with settlement arrangements at central banks. It concludes that it is extremely unlikely that electronic money will displace bank notes or the settlement services that are offered by central banks in the foreseeable future. Moreover, even in the extremely unlikely case that the spread of stored‐value cards leads to the elimination of bank notes and that the development of network money permits alternative settlement services to be offered that effectively competes with central bank services, central banks would very likely be able to continue to influence the very short‐term rate of interest. They would therefore be able to maintain their influence over aggregate demand and inflation even in such circumstances.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.533
Threshold uncertainty score0.879

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.240 · 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