MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2423846207 · doi:10.12735/jfe.v3i4p01

Post Keynesian Theory and Evidence of Money Supply Endogeneity: A Review Essay

2015· review· en· W2423846207 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sabri Nayan, Norsiah Kadir, Abdul Hafiz Yusof, Noor Azillah Mohamad Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Finance & Economics · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Theory and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndogeneityKeynesian economicsEconomicsMoney supplyPost-Keynesian economicsNew Keynesian economicsMacroeconomicsMonetary economicsNeoclassical economicsEconometricsMonetary policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Money is the life-blood of any modern market-oriented economy.The level of money supply - the quantity and velocity of money circulated in such an economy would determine its health. The central issue in managing the economy is to understand how money supply is determined.The history of modern monetary economics actually has witnessed the emergence of two opposing views pertaining to the role of central bank in controlling the supply of money in an economy.A group of economists, known as monetarists, under the influence of Milton Friedman, contended that money supply in an economy is exogenously determined. Post Keynesian however holds the view that money supply is endogenously rather than exogenously determined. Examining the theory of endogenous money as well as empirical work, the present paper has found that money supply in several countries is endogenously determined.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Finance & EconomicsSame topicEconomic Theory and PolicyFrench-language works237,207