MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2908443700 · doi:10.3390/jrfm12010007

A Divisia User Cost Interpretation of the Yield Spread Recession Prediction

2019· article· en· W2908443700 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ryan S. Mattson

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
KeywordsDivisia indexRecessionYield (engineering)EconomicsInterpretation (philosophy)Yield curveEconometricsCredit spread (options)BondInterest rateComputer scienceActuarial scienceMonetary economicsMacroeconomicsMathematicsStatisticsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A re-evaluation of the role of interest rates is necessary in the wake of the Great Recession. This paper will re-evaluate the interpretation and empirical use of the yield spread as a predictor of recessions, focusing on the simplified methodology in a New York Federal Reserve Bank paper by Estrella and Trubin. Using the user cost difference formula to calculate bond prices following the methodology in the Divisia literature begun by William A. Barnett and a unique data set from the Center for Financial Stability, the yield spread is shown to be a form of the user cost difference, and use of the user cost is shown to marginally improve the predictive abilities of the yield spread. Further research into this view of the link of interest rates and economic activity is proposed.

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)0.024
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.202
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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