MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028258339 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v7n2p293

The Application of Gold Price, Interest Rates and Inflation Expectations in Capital Markets

2015· article· en· W2028258339 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Adam Abdullah, Mohd Jaffri Abu Bakar

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsInterest rateCapital marketInflation (cosmology)Real interest rateGold as an investmentMonetary economicsFinancial economicsFisher hypothesisOrder (exchange)Financial marketDominance (genetics)Price levelFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this research is to determine a forecasting model of the price of gold in relation to the rate of interest from 1971–2013 that would benefit wealth managers in their forward interpretation of capital market expectations. It is not a model for market makers, since the price-setting dominance of banks in the physical as well as derivative markets presents a problem for any economic agent participating in these markets. Nonetheless, the ability to understand the variability of gold, interest rates and prices would clearly enhance financial planning and investor performance. This research models a full population of the price of gold with the rate of interest, in order to assess what impact a change in the interest rate would have on a change in the gold price (and vice versa). In developing a model price of gold that is strongly correlated with the actual price, the outcome of the research expects to show that not only is the interest rate and the gold price manipulated in relation to each other, but would also affirm the Gibson’s Paradox, that real gold is inversely related with the real interest rate, so that real prices are positively related with the real interest rate.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207