Bubble, Bubble - Is there House Price Trouble -- in Canada?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian and U.S. real estate markets have compared similarly along dimensions such as inflation, mortgage interest rates, population and income growth and other measures. With respect to house prices, however, the series have moved in similar ways at some times, but then significantly diverged by the second quarter of 2007. For example, Canadian and U.S. house price indices reached essentially identical levels in 1987Q2, 1995Q1 and 2007Q2. As a consequence of the U.S. financial crisis and precipitous decline in house prices, the U.S. and Canadian indices have sharply diverged. Our paper examines whether or not the house price indices were driven by fundamentals during these time periods, or whether they diverged from fundamentals. We find that the U.S. house prices closely aligned with fundamentals until the mortgage markets crashed in 2008. We find that Canadian house prices continue to align with fundamentals. However, there have been some significant market changes between the two countries and key housing market measures indicate that Canadian markets are now moving along some paths similar to those taken by the U.S. prior to the crash.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".