MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115620784 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v5n10p29

Testing the Causal Nexus between Output and Unemployment: Swedish Data

2012· article· en· W2115620784 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aneel Salman

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicUnemployment and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnemploymentGranger causalityEconomicsNexus (standard)Gross domestic productReal gross domestic productEconometricsCausality (physics)MacroeconomicsLabour economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we aim at testing for the Granger causality test between real GDP and unemployment in Sweden. We model a VAR (4) model on Swedish two macro-economic variables, namely, the gross domestic product (GDP) and unemployment (Un) for the period 1993:Q1 – 2011:Q2. Our main aim is to supporting further empirical evidence so as to identify the relationship between the GDP and unemployment in terms of females, males and total unemployment, with special reference to Sweden. A Granger causality test is used. The test shows that it is the GDP Granger that causes unemployment but not the other way around. An econometric model is deployed and developed on the basis of Okun’s Law. Total unemployment, male unemployment and female unemployment coefficients of the relationship between the GDP and unemployment coefficients are diverted from Okun’s coefficient and they are found to be approximately 8 per cent and statistically significant for Sweden. This stayed almost steady over time. This result also has important implications for determining macroeconomic policy.

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)0.003
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.405
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.039 · 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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicUnemployment and Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207