MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127015016 · doi:10.1017/s1365100507060245

NONLINEARITY IN THE CANADIAN AND U.S. LABOR MARKETS: UNIVARIATE AND MULTIVARIATE EVIDENCE FROM A BATTERY OF TESTS

2007· article· en· W2127015016 on OpenAlexaffabout
Theodore Panagiotidis, Gianluigi Pelloni

Bibliographic record

VenueMacroeconomic Dynamics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsUnivariateEconometricsUnemploymentLinearityEmpirical evidenceMultivariate statisticsAggregate (composite)Nonlinear systemFinancial economicsMacroeconomicsStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nonlinearity of macroeconomic processes is becoming an increasingly important issue at both the theoretical and empirical levels. This trend holds for labor market variables as well. The reallocation theory of unemployment relies on nonlinearities. At the same time there is mounting empirical evidence of business cycles asymmetries. Thus the assumption of linearity/nonlinearity becomes crucial for the corroboration of labor market theories. This paper turns the microscope on the assumption of linearity and investigates the presence of asymmetries in aggregate and disaggregate labor market variables. The assumption of linearity is tested using five statistical tests for U.S. and Canadian unemployment rates and growth rates of the employment sectoral shares of construction, finance, manufacturing, and trade. An AR(p) model was used to remove any linear structure from the series. Evidence of nonlinearity is found for the sectoral shares with all five statistical tests in the U.S. case but not at the aggregate level. The results for Canada are not clear-cut. Evidence of unspecified nonlinearity is found in the unemployment rate and in the sectoral shares. Overall, important asymmetries are found in disaggregated labor market variables in the univariate setting. The linearity hypothesis was also examined in a multivariate framework. Evidence is provided that important asymmetries exist and a linear VAR cannot capture the dynamics of employment reallocation.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
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 score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations17
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacroeconomic DynamicsSame topicMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactFrench-language works237,207