MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792499961 · doi:10.1017/s1365100517001006

THE DEMAND FOR LIQUID ASSETS: EVIDENCE FROM THE MINFLEX LAURENT DEMAND SYSTEM WITH CONDITIONALLY HETEROSKEDASTIC ERRORS

2018· article· en· W2792499961 on OpenAlexaff
Dongfeng Chang, Apostolos Serletis

Bibliographic record

VenueMacroeconomic Dynamics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomics of Agriculture and Food Markets
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomoscedasticityEconomicsHeteroscedasticityCurvatureEconometricsMerge (version control)Speculative demandCovariance matrixCovarianceInferenceMathematical economicsDemand for moneyMathematicsComputer scienceMonetary policyMonetary economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the demand for money and the degree of substitutability among monetary assets in the United States using the generalized Leontief and the Minflex Laurent (ML) models as suggested by Serletis and Shahmoradi (2007). In doing so, we merge the demand systems literature with the recent financial econometrics literature, relaxing the homoskedasticity assumption and instead assuming that the covariance matrix of the errors of flexible demand systems is time-varying. We also pay explicit attention to theoretical regularity, treating the curvature property as a maintained hypothesis. Our findings indicate that only the curvature constrained ML model with a Baba, Engle, Kraft, and Kroner (BEKK) specification for the conditional covariance matrix is able to generate inference consistent with theoretical regularity.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacroeconomic DynamicsSame topicEconomics of Agriculture and Food MarketsFrench-language works237,207