MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2549670306 · doi:10.1111/caje.12218

News shocks and labour market dynamics in matching models

2016· article· en· W2549670306 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Konstantinos Theodoridis, Francesco Zanetti

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLeverhulme Trust
KeywordsEconomicsBusiness cycleUnemploymentInvestment (military)Matching (statistics)EconometricsProductivityTotal factor productivityDynamic stochastic general equilibriumBayesian probabilityMonetary economicsMacroeconomic modelBaseline (sea)MacroeconomicsMonetary policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We enrich a baseline real business cycle (RBC) model with search and matching frictions on the labour market and real frictions that are helpful in accounting for the response of macroeconomic aggregates to shocks. The analysis allows shocks to have an unanticipated and a news (i.e., anticipated) component. The Bayesian estimation of the model reveals that the model that includes news shocks on macroeconomic aggregates produces a remarkable fit of the data. News shocks in stationary and non‐stationary TFP, investment‐specific productivity and preference shocks significantly affect labour market variables and explain a sizeable fraction of macroeconomic fluctuations at medium‐ and long‐run horizons. Historically, news shocks have played a relevant role for output, but they have had a limited influence on unemployment.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.052 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économiqueSame topicMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactFrench-language works237,207