MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949248274 · doi:10.3390/jrfm12020100

Financial Structure, Misery Index, and Economic Growth: Time Series Empirics from Pakistan

2019· article· en· W2949248274 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nianyong Wang, Muhammad Haroon Shah, Kishwar Ali, Shah Abbas, Sami Ullah

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTrường Đại học Kinh tế - Luật, Đại học Quốc gia Thành phố Hồ Chí MinhZhongnan University of Economics and Law
KeywordsEconomicsOpenness to experienceDistributed lagIndex (typography)Inflation (cosmology)MacroeconomicsUnemploymentTime seriesMonetary economicsReal gross domestic productEconometricsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study empirically analyzes the impact of the financial structure and misery index on economic growth in Pakistan. We adopted Autoregressive-Distributed Lag (ARDL) for a co-integration approach to the data analysis and used time series data from 1989 to 2017. We used GDP as the dependent variable; the Financial Development index (FDI) and misery index as the explanatory variables; and remittances, real interest, and trade openness as the control variables. The empirical results indicate the existence of a long-term relationship among the included variables in the model and the FD index, misery index, interest rate, trade openness, and remittances as the main affecting variables of GDP in the long run. The government needs appropriate reform in the financial sector and external sector in order to achieve a desirable level of economic growth in Pakistan. The misery index is constructed based on unemployment and inflation, which has a negative implication on the economic growth, and the government needs policies to reduce unemployment and inflation.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicFiscal Policy and Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207