MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2282369960 · doi:10.26509/frbc-ec-201509

Why Has Consumption Been So Volatile in the New Millennium?

2015· article· en· W2282369960 on OpenAlexaff
Yuliya Demyanyk, Dmytro Hryshko, Daniel Kolliner, María Luengo-Prado, Bent E. Sørensen

Bibliographic record

VenueEconomic Commentary (Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExplanatory powerConsumption (sociology)EconomicsGas consumptionEconometricsPhysicsSocial scienceSociologyEnvironmental economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

US consumption has gone through steep ups and downs since the turn of the millennium, but the causes of these fluctuations are still imperfectly identified. We describe research that quantifies the relative impact of nine significant determinants of consumption growth. The explanatory power of these factors varies by period, implying that successful modelling of this decade poses many challenges.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconomic Commentary (Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland)Same topicHousing Market and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207