Bibliographic record
Abstract
In December 2012, as a kick-off to the Federal Reserve System's centennial, the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland asked leading monetary historians and macroeconomic economists to address current and recurring economic concerns that confront central banks from a historical perspective. The resulting papers, published in this volume, cover a wide range of issues, including the meaning of central-bank independence, the role of communications and rules in fostering credibility, the evolution of the lender-of-last-resort function, the mechanism through which banks transmit economic shocks, and prospects for a European monetary union. A retrospective on the Federal Reserve, this book contains essays by some of the world's most prominent financial historians and provides a thorough overview of the evolution of the monetary standard over the past two centuries. Offering historical context as a complement to economic theory and empiricism, these papers investigate how financial infrastructure shapes economic outcomes through comparisons of Canada and the United States. Suggested citation: Humpage, Owen F., ed., 2015. Current Federal Reserve Policy Under the Lens of Economic History: Essays to Commemorate the Federal Reserve System's Centennial. New York: Cambridge University Press.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".