The GCC Single Currency and Competing Views on Regime Choice Determinants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper explores different views of regime choice and investigates theoretically and empirically the feasibility of a potential monetary union among the six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council – the United Arab Emirates, the State of Bahrain, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Sultanate of Oman, the State of Qatar, and the State of Kuwait. The theoretical model suggests that the optimum foreign regime needs to maximize oil revenues under the assumptions of internal and external balances. This is proved to occur at the possible maximum expected foreign-exchange rate or at the minimal level of uncertainty and volatility in foreign-exchange rate markets. Calculations using a calibrated model show that the proposed monetary union is likely to yield economic benefits for the GCC countries if they adopt a foreign regime pegged to SDR.I presented this paper at the 44th annual conference of Canadian Economic Association - CEA Laval University, Quebec City, Canada, May, 2010Authors: Ghada Gomaa A. Mohamed, Alexandria UniversityManochehr Eirandoust, United Arab Emirates University
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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".