MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2247695059

Investment-Specific News Shocks and U.S. Business Cycles

2013· preprint· en· W2247695059 on OpenAlexaff
Nadav Ben Zeev, Hashmat Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2013
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness cycleEconomicsRecessionInvestment (military)Futures studiesConsumption (sociology)Monetary economicsVariance (accounting)Demand shockGeneral equilibrium theoryMacroeconomicsEconometricsPolitical scienceAccountingComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides robust evidence that news shocks about future investment-specific technology (IST) constitute a signicant force behind U.S. business cycles. Extending a recent empirical approach to identifying news shocks, we find that positive IST news shocks induce comovement, i.e., raise output, consumption, investment, and hours. These shocks account for 70% of the business cycle variation in output, hours, and consumption, and 60% of the variation in investment, and have played an important role in 9 of the last 10 U.S recessions. IST news shocks also dominate unanticipated IST shocks in accounting for the forecast variance of aggregate variables. The findings have two important implications for research on news driven business cycles. First, they provide strong support for shifting focus to IST news shocks when investigating the role of news (or foresight) in driving business cycles. Second, an important avenue for further research is to consider structural mechanisms that can enhance the role of IST news shocks in estimated dynamic general equilibrium models.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicEconomic Growth and ProductivityFrench-language works237,207