MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2905977906 · doi:10.3390/jrfm12010010

What Determines Utility of International Currencies?

2019· article· en· W2905977906 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eiji Ogawa, Makoto Muto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurrencyMarket liquidityEconomicsLiberian dollarReserve currencyMonetary economicsInternational economicsForeign exchange riskFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In previous studies, we estimated a time series of coefficients on five international currencies (the US dollar, the euro, the Japanese yen, the British pound, and the Swiss franc) in a utility function. We call the coefficients utilities of international currencies. The time series show that the utility of the US dollar as an international currency has remained in the first position in the changing international monetary system despite of the fact that the euro was created as a single common currency for European countries. On one hand, the utility of the Japanese yen has been declining as an international currency. In this paper, we investigate what determines the utility of international currencies. We use a dynamic panel data model to analyze the issue with Generalized Method of Moments (GMM). Specifically, liquidity shortage in terms of an international currency means that it is inconvenient for economic agents to use the relevant currency for international economic transactions. In other words, liquidity shortages might reduce the utility of an international currency. In this analysis we focus on liquidity premium which represents a liquidity shortage in terms of an international currency. Our empirical results showed not only inertia in terms of change but also the impact of a liquidity shortage in an international currency on the utility of the relevant international currency.

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)0.015
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial management→Same topicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact→French-language works237,207→