MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Testing for Cointegration between House Prices and Economic Fundamentals

2010· article· en· W1686069590 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

VenueReal Estate Economics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCointegrationEconomicsEconometricsNonlinear systemEmpirical evidenceMacroeconomicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Economic theory predicts three possibilities for the cointegration relationship between house prices and economic fundamentals: linear cointegration, nonlinear cointegration and no cointegration. In contrast, the empirical literature has only examined linear cointegration. This article argues that ignoring nonlinear cointegration may lead to misleading conclusions that no cointegration exists between house prices and the fundamentals. To illustrate this point, I test for cointegration for ten U.S. cities and find that only one city shows evidence of linear cointegration. Further analysis using the two‐step testing procedure yields evidence of nonlinear cointegration for six other cities. Still, there are three cities left out without evidence of nonlinear cointegration. Further studies are needed to test for other forms of nonlinear cointegration before a conclusion of no cointegration can be reached for the remaining three cities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.242
Teacher spread0.200 · 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