MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127229245 · doi:10.3386/w13736

Global Forces and Monetary Policy Effectiveness

2008· report· en· W2127229245 on OpenAlexaff
Jean Boivin, Marc Giannoni

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Bureau of Economic Research · 2008
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMonetary policyEconomicsMonetary economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we quantify the changes in the relationship between international forces and many key US macroeconomic variables over the 1984-2005 period, and analyze changes in the monetary policy transmission mechanism. We do so by estimating a Factor-Augmented VAR on a large set of US and international data series. We find that the role of international factors in explaining US variables has been changing over the 1984-2005 period. However, while some US series have become more correlated with global factors, there is little evidence suggesting that these factors have become systematically more important. We don't find strong evidence of a change in the transmission mechanism of monetary policy due to global forces. Taking our point estimates literally, global forces do not seem to have played an important role in the US monetary transmission mechanism between 1984 and 1999. In addition, since the year 2000, the initial response of the US economy following a monetary policy shock ---the first 6 to 8 quarters ---is essentially the same as the one that has been observed in the 1984-1999 period. However, point estimates suggest that the growing importance of global forces might have contributed to reducing some of the persistence in the responses, two or more years after the shocks. Overall, we conclude that if global forces have had an effect on the monetary transmission mechanism, this is a recent phenomenon.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.237
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations85
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Bureau of Economic ResearchSame topicGlobal Financial Crisis and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207