MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1572710681 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v8n5p55

“Global” Productivity Trends, Consumption Expenditures and US Macroeconomic Conditions: A Verification of the “Contagion” Phenomenon

2015· article· en· W1572710681 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rexford Abaidoo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsPhenomenonConsumption (sociology)Inflation (cosmology)ProductivityEstimationMacroeconomicsMonetary economicsEconomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Panel discussions on global economic performance and the role of economic shocks, often creates the notion that adverse macroeconomic conditions prevailing in dominant economies such as the U.S, tend to have automatic impact on domestic conditions of other economies around the world. This study examined this perceived automatic contagion phenomenon by verifying how key modeled adverse macroeconomic conditions characterizing the U.S economy influence two macroeconomic indicators within selected advanced economies. Empirical estimation via SUR estimation technique verified this contagion phenomenon to some degree; test results suggests adverse macroeconomic conditions such as economic policy uncertainty, inflation expectations etc. can influence core economic indicators within some economies around the world. This study however, also found that not all cross-border interactions exhibits features of the contagion phenomenon, because some economies examined seem to be relatively insulated from modeled cross-border macroeconomic conditions.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.207
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business Research→Same topicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact→French-language works237,207→