Extracting information shocks from the Bank of England inflation density forecasts
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper shows how to extract the density of information shocks from revisions of the Bank of England's inflation density forecasts. An information shock is defined in this paper as a random variable that contains the set of information made available between two consecutive forecasting exercises and that has been incorporated into a revised forecast for a fixed point event. Studying the moments of these information shocks can be useful in understanding how the Bank has changed its assessment of risks surrounding inflation in the light of new information, and how it has modified its forecasts accordingly. The variance of the information shock is interpreted in this paper as a new measure of ex ante inflation uncertainty that measures the uncertainty that the Bank anticipates information perceived in a particular quarter will pose on inflation. A measure of information absorption that indicates the approximate proportion of the information content in a revised forecast that is attributable to information made available since the last forecast release is also proposed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it