MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1558589819 · doi:10.7202/044878ar

Les déterminants des entrées de capitaux en Asie : quel rôle pour les stratégies de carry trade?

2010· article· fr· W1558589819 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sophie Brana, Delphine Lahet

Bibliographic record

VenueL Actualité économique · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le retour massif des capitaux dans les pays asiatiques, de 2003 à 2007, a rappelé la situation d’avant la crise financière de 1997. L’une des explications avancées est l’abondance de la liquidité mondiale ainsi que le niveau élevé des positions de carry trade, notamment avec le yen comme monnaie de financement. Cet article étudie les déterminants des entrées de capitaux en Thaïlande, puis sur un groupe de quatre économies asiatiques, entre 1990 et 2007, en prenant en compte explicitement le comportement des investisseurs internationaux, à travers les stratégies de carry trade et des indicateurs d’appétit pour le risque. Nous montrons que, si, sur la période de précrise de 1997, les entrées de capitaux sont fortement expliquées par l’évolution des fondamentaux des émergents d’Asie, sur la période récente, elles ont été motivées par la recherche de rendements élevés, dans un contexte de surliquidité mondiale. Ainsi, le retour des capitaux en Asie serait bien expliqué par les stratégies de carry trade avec le yen comme monnaie de financement. Les stratégies alternatives de carry trade ne sont pas apparues significatives.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueL Actualité économique→Same topicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies→French-language works237,207→