MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806896511 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v9n3p53

Fiscal Marksmanship Ex-ante to Fiscal Rules in India: An Empirical Investigation

2018· article· en· W2806896511 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lekha Chakraborty, Darshy Sinha

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
KeywordsEconomicsEx-anteRevenueFiscal yearFiscal policyEconometricsMacroeconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We analyse the fiscal marksmanship of the macro-fiscal variables, ex-ante to the formulation of fiscal rules in India. The fiscal marksmanship is the accuracy of budgetary forecasting. The fiscal rules have been legally mandated in India in the form of fiscal responsibility and budget management Act (FRBM Act) in 2003, with a criteria of fiscal-deficit threshold ratio of 3 per cent of GDP and also phasing out of revenue deficit. Using Theil’s inequality coefficient (U) based on the mean square prediction error, the paper estimates the magnitude of errors in the budgetary forecasts in India during the period ex-ante to fiscal rules, and also decomposed the errors into biasedness, unequal variation and random components to analyze the source of error. The proportion of error due to random variation has been significantly higher (which is beyond the control of the forecaster), while the errors due to bias has been negligible in the period prior to fiscal rules in India. The analysis related to efficiency of forecasts also showed that no significant improvement in forecasts over time prior to fiscal responsibility and budget management (FRBM) Act.

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)0.011
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.235
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.165 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactFrench-language works237,207