CO‐MOVEMENT OF AUSTRALIAN STATE BUSINESS CYCLES*
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use a variety of techniques to examine the nature and degree of co‐movement among Australian state business cycles. Consistent with the results of Dixon and Shepherd (2001 ), we find that these cycles move quite closely together, with particularly strong links between the cycles of the larger states. We then seek to understand the causes of this co‐movement by using an unobserved components model to distinguish between various shocks and their transmission. Our model implies that the major source of this co‐movement in state activity is the commonality of shocks affecting state cycles. In contrast, spillovers of region‐specific shocks appear to play only a minor role in creating co‐movement, though region‐specific shocks themselves have a moderate influence on cyclical fluctuations. These findings are consistent with the results of recent studies for the United States, Canada and Europe, where common shocks have also been found to dominate regional cyclical activity.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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 it