MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605152060 · doi:10.23941/ejpe.v6i1.118

Early marginalist ideas on money: some neglected exceptions to the quantity theory

2013· article· en· W2605152060 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Germán David Feldman

Bibliographic record

VenueErasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Theory and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y TécnicasDeutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst
KeywordsEconomicsLiberian dollarQuantity theory of moneyKeynesian economicsEndogenous moneyNeoclassical economicsRelevance (law)Quarter (Canadian coin)Positive economicsLawMonetary policyFinancePolitical scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The quantity theory of money (QTM) is an important building block of neoclassical economics. This has led scholars to believe that all monetary accounts proposed by marginalist economists are inherently based on the QTM. However, within the bimetallic controversy of the last quarter of the 19th century, there were some neoclassical proposals which departed from the framework of the QTM. In this article, I analyse three of these accounts: Alfred Marshall's symmetallism, Irving Fisher's compensated dollar plan, and Knut Wicksell's inconvertible paper standard. These monetary arrangements—especially the first two of them—have rarely been studied in the literature. Still, their relevance should not be neglected in current times in which the economics profession—both orthodox and heterodox approaches—has moved towards an endogenous money view. The proposals studied also show that the neutrality of money does not necessarily imply the QTM, as it is often suggested.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueErasmus Journal for Philosophy and EconomicsSame topicEconomic Theory and PolicyFrench-language works237,207