MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2324282403 · doi:10.1002/jae.2287

FACTOR ANALYSIS OF A LARGE DSGE MODEL

2012· article· en· W2324282403 on OpenAlex
Alexei Onatski, Francisco J. Ruge‐Murcia

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Econometrics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDynamic stochastic general equilibriumEconometricsDynamic factorFactor analysisEconomicsFactor (programming language)Computer sciencePrincipal component analysisIndex (typography)Space (punctuation)MacroeconomicsMonetary policyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY We study the workings of the factor analysis of high‐dimensional data using artificial series generated from a large, multi‐sector dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) model. The objective is to use the DSGE model as a laboratory that allows us to shed some light on the practical benefits and limitations of using factor analysis techniques on economic data. We explain in what sense the artificial data can be thought of having a factor structure, study the theoretical properties of the principal components estimates of the factor space, investigate the substantive reason(s) for the good performance of diffusion index forecasts, and assess the quality of the factor analysis of highly disaggregated data. In all our exercises, we explain the precise relationship between the factors and the basic macroeconomic shocks postulated by the model. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.275
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.085 · 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