MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Uncovered interest parity with fundamentals: a Brazilian exchange rate forecast model

2002· book-chapter· en· W201470466 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marcelo Kfoury Muinhos, Paulo Springer de Freitas, Fabio Araújo

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2002
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsInflation (cosmology)Exchange rateInternational Fisher effectCurrencyEconometricsInterest rate parityNominal interest ratePath (computing)Variance (accounting)Quarter (Canadian coin)Real interest rateValue (mathematics)Inflation targetingInterest rateMonetary economicsMonetary policyStatisticsMathematicsComputer scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Forecasting the nominal exchange rate path is one of the most challenging aspects of an inflation-targeting framework. According to Bank of Brazil estimates, the pass-through from nominal exchange rate movements to inflation is around 10% in each quarter. Therefore, an accurate forecast of the nominal value of the currency is very important for the efficiency of an inflation-targeting regime. If the evaluation of the future exchange rate path can be made more precise, it may reduce the variance in output and inflation. Uncovered interest parity (UIP), which relates the expected nominal depreciation to the nominal interest rate differential, has been a popular model for exchange rate forecasting. But UIP has been questioned as an adequate tool to forecast future exchange rates because many empirical tests have found a negative correlation between exchange rate changes and the interest differential, in contradiction to what is predicted by UIP. This situation has led us to consider what can be gained and lost with other models for forecasting the exchange rate. A simple alternative is to assume that the exchange rate follows a random walk and is not cointegrated with any exogenous variable for which we have data. The expected future exchange rate therefore should be equal to the current value. This first approach, although simple and transparent, does not preclude the risk of occasional large forecast errors in the exchange rate and hence inflation.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.074 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooks→Same topicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact→French-language works237,207→