MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560367639 · doi:10.21098/bemp.v6i3.329

Menerawang Kebijakan Moneter yang ‘Forward Looking’

2005· article· id· W2560367639 on OpenAlexaff
Firman Mochtar

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Monetary Economics and Banking · 2005
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsPhysicsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dengan mempertimbangkan kemungkinan dampak interaksi antara kebijakan fiskal dan kebijakan moneter serta turut memperhatikan sumber pembiayaan bagi penerapan satu kebijakan, tulisan ini berusaha menelaah dampak penerapan kebijakan moneter yang ‘forward looking’. Hasil menerawang mengindikasikan bahwa upaya menerapkan kebijakan moneter yang ‘forward looking’ dalam periode SBI sebagai piranti moneter relatif terbatas. Sempitnya ruang gerak kebijakan moneter yang ‘forward looking’ pada periode SBI ini tersirat dari kemungkinan munculnya fenomena ‘tight monetary paradox’ saat kebijakan moneter ketat diterapkan. Gambaran berbeda bilamana kebijakan moneter yang ‘forward looking’ tersebut diterapkan pada saat piranti yang digunakan adalah surat utang negara (SUN, misalnya T-Bills). Kebijakan moneter yang ‘forward looking’ dalam periode T-Bills ini terindikasi lebih leluasa bergerak untuk mengendalikan inflasi ke depan. Indikasi lain yang juga terlihat dari tulisan ini adalah sulitnya bagi kebijakan moneter yang ‘forward looking’ untuk dapat berdiri sendiri dalam formulasi kebijakan moneter. Meski dengan bobot yang lebih kecil dibandingkan bobot yang diberikan kepada proyeksi inflasi, formulasi kebijakan moneter masih tetap perlu mempertimbangkan kondisi inflasi yang sedang terjadi untuk melengkapi kebijakan moneter yang forward looking tersebut.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.009

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.176
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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Monetary Economics and BankingSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207