MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W25972341 · doi:10.1007/s10522-015-9583-y

An ARDL Analysis Of The Exchange Rates Principal Determinants: ASEAN-5 Aligned with The Yen

2011· article· en· W25972341 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Abdalrahman AbuDalu, Elsadig Musa Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Economic and Financial Review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPurchasing power parityEconomicsDistributed lagShort runExchange rateMoney supplyMonetary economicsInternational economicsInterest rateEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines an empirical analysis of long-run and short-run forcing variables of purchasing power parity (PPP) for ASEAN-5 currencies: Malaysian Ringgit, Indonesian Rupiah, the Philippines Peso, Thailand Bath, and Singapore Dollar, against the Japanese Yen, i.e., their real exchange rate (RER). This study uses a recently developed autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) approach to co-integration (Pesaran et al., 2001) over the period 1991:Q1 – 2006:Q2. Our empirical results point out that the domestic money supply (M1) is the significant long run forcing variable of PPP for ASEAN-5 RER’s for the study periods. However, in the short- run the impact of variables have different impact during the sub-periods and full period for ASEAN-5 countries, the results suggest that the domestic money supply (M1) for Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines ,and Singapore respectively, , have the highest significant short run forcing variable of PPP for countries RER’s. However, foreign interest rates followed by domestic money supply are the short-run forcing variables for Thailand’s RER. This may be due to the peculiarity of Thailand government’s management of the Asian Financial Crisis (AFC).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Economic and Financial ReviewSame topicMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactFrench-language works237,207