MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2916789885 · doi:10.1007/s00181-021-02119-y

Fiscal reaction functions for the advanced economies revisited

2021· preprint· en· W2916789885 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEmpirical Economics · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policies and Political Economy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSapienza Università di Roma
KeywordsEconomicsMonetary economicsSovereigntyDebtFunction (biology)Sovereign debtFiscal policyMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We revisit the relationship between the primary balances/GDP and debt/GDP ratios (fiscal reaction function, FRF), in the advanced economies, showing that using adequate tests and estimators leads to question the validity of the current consensus. Using data for 1961–2019, we find that long-run FRFs exist only in a small number of advanced economies (Belgium, Germany, Greece, Norway, Portugal and Sweden), with polynomial effects with fiscal fatigue only in Germany. These results warn against the widespread practice of estimating homogeneous polynomial panel FRFs. Limiting the sample to 1961–2007, thus excluding the 2008 crisis and its aftermath, FRFs hold also in Canada, Ireland, Italy (polynomial), Spain and USA, though not in Germany, and the coefficients are generally larger. Particularly, after 2008 European Union countries appear somehow to have been more likely to implement FRFs.

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.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.657
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.219 · 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