MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2740008170 · doi:10.1515/snde-2015-0037

Dating US business cycles with macro factors

2016· article· en· W2740008170 on OpenAlexaff
Sebastian Fossati

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Nonlinear Dynamics and Econometrics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconometricsProbit modelMacroAutoregressive modelRecessionFactor analysisProbitMarkov chainStatisticsDynamic factorFalse positives and false negativesEconomicsSample (material)False positive paradoxMathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Latent factors estimated from panels of macroeconomic indicators are used to generate recession probabilities for the US economy. The focus is on current (rather than future) business conditions. Two macro factors are considered: (1) a dynamic factor estimated by maximum likelihood from a set of 4 monthly series; (2) the first of eight static factors estimated by principal components using a panel of 102 monthly series. Recession probabilities generated using standard probit, autoregressive probit, and Markov-switching models exhibit very different properties. Overall, a simple Markov-switching model based on the big data macro factor generates the sequence of out-of-sample class predictions that better approximates NBER recession months. Nevertheless, it is shown that the selection of the best performing model depends on the forecaster’s relative tolerance for false positives and false negatives.

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)0.028
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.117 · 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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Nonlinear Dynamics and EconometricsSame topicMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactFrench-language works237,207