MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2777707120 · doi:10.3386/w14381

Accounting for Persistence and Volatility of Good-Level Real Exchange Rates: The Role of Sticky Information

2008· preprint· en· W2777707120 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mario J. Crucini, Mototsugu Shintani, Takayuki Tsuruga

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Bureau of Economic Research · 2008
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTokyo Center for Economic ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPersistence (discontinuity)Volatility (finance)EconometricsAccountingEconomicsBusinessEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Volatile and persistent real exchange rates are observed not only in aggregate series but also in the individual good level data.Kehoe and Midrigan (2007) recently showed that, under a standard assumption on nominal price stickiness, empirical frequencies of micro price adjustment cannot replicate the time-series properties of the law-of-one-price deviations.We extend their sticky price model by combining good specific price adjustment with information stickiness in the sense of Mankiw and Reis (2002).Under a reasonable assumption on the money growth process, we show that the model fully explains both persistence and volatility of the good-level real exchange rates.Furthermore, our framework allows for multiple cities within a country.Using a panel of U.S.-Canadian city pairs, we estimate a dynamic price adjustment process for each 165 individual goods.The empirical result suggests that the dispersion of average time of information update across goods is comparable to that of average time of price adjustment.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.487
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.065 · 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

Citations22
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Bureau of Economic ResearchSame topicMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactFrench-language works237,207