MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790356746

Macroeconomic Synchronization and MonetaryUnions: Is the Euro Area more Synchronous than otherMonetary Unions and are Monetary Unions more Synchronousthan non-Monetary Unions?

2015· article· en· W2790356746 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Patrick M. Crowley, Christopher Trombley

Bibliographic record

VenueArchive of European Integration (AEI) (University of Pittsburgh) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynchronicityEconomicsCurrencyMonetary policyMonetary hegemonyState (computer science)Monetary baseMonetary economicsUnemploymentInternational economicsMacroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within currency unions, the conventional wisdom is that there should be a high degree of macroeconomic synchronicity between the constituent parts of the union. But this has not been tested compared to a base sample of countries that do not belong to a monetary union, so this paper endeavors to do exactly that. Although the US is probably one of the longest standing monetary unions in existence, there are others such as Canada and Australia, which have similar federalist structures and relatively independent States or Provinces. In this paper we take euro area data, US State macro data, Canadian provincial data and Australian state data �namely real Gross State Product (GSP), the GSP de�ator and unemployment data �and use techniques relating to recurrence plots to measure the degree of synchronicity of movement over time. The results are expected to show that for the most part monetary unions are more synchronous than non-monetary unions and that the euro area data is highly synchronous, particularly since the �financial crisis, compared to other monetary unions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchive of European Integration (AEI) (University of Pittsburgh)Same topicGlobal Financial Crisis and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207