MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021083061 · doi:10.1080/00036840701604362

Measuring regional effects of monetary policy in Canada

2008· article· en· W2021083061 on OpenAlexaffabout
George Georgopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Economics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonetary policyEconomicsVector autoregressionInterest rateMonetary economicsImpulse responseStructural vector autoregressionMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article measures monetary policy shocks and examines whether the effects of such shocks have differential regional effects in Canada. We identify three possible sources of regional effects: differences in the importance of interest-sensitive industries, differences in the contribution of exports to output and differences in the proportion of small relative to large firms. Using the overnight interest rate as the instrument of monetary policy, we present impulse responses of industry output from a recursive vector autoregression, which incorporates a cointegrating relation. The results show that manufacturing and primary industries are the most interest sensitive. We conduct impulse responses of provincial employment from a monetary contraction. The results show that Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island (PEI), primary industry-based provinces, are strongly and adversely affected by a monetary contraction. Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, also primary-based, are also affected. Ontario, which is manufacturing-based, is also affected but to a lesser extent. The response of Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and British Columbia are not statistically significant.

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)0.004
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.170

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.117 · 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

Citations41
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied EconomicsSame topicMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactFrench-language works237,207