MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065094228 · doi:10.1111/1467-9787.00310

Regional Perspectives on Dollarization in Canada

2003· article· en· W2065094228 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Regional Science · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional Economics and Spatial Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiberian dollarCurrencyBusiness cycleUs dollarEconomicsInternational tradeInternational economicsEconomic geographyGeographyMonetary economicsFinanceMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper we investigate whether it is preferable for Canadian regions to individually adopt the U.S. dollar or to remain with the current currency arrangement. The empirical analysis focuses on the cross–correlations of various business cycle measures of Canadian regions, of Canada, and of the United States. The business cycle investigation is completed by the analysis of two other important criteria for optimum currency areas, industrial specialization and trade interdependence. Our results highlight a significant heterogeneity across Canadian provinces. In particular, it transpires that it could be economically advantageous for the central provinces of Ontario and Quebec and to a lesser extent British Columbia to adopt the U.S. dollar. In contrast, it is not as clear what the other regions should do, the final answer depending on the path the larger three provinces take.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.893

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.182 · 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