MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964661299 · doi:10.3138/cpp.2018-066

Two Types of (Slight) Flexibility in Bank of Canada Projections, 2003–2019

2019· article· en· W2964661299 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Gregor W. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Policy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)Inflation (cosmology)EconomicsMonetary policyInflation targetingMonetary economicsExchange-rate flexibilityInflation rateIndex (typography)EconometricsReal interest rateMacroeconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Central bankers and other economists sometimes describe the inflation targeting practiced in Canada as flexible. This flexibility refers to deferring the planned return of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation rate to the 2 percent target. In this article, I outline two ways to measure flexibility: by seeing whether the forecast for future inflation varies with either (1) current values of inflation or output growth or (2) the forecast for future output growth. The latter correlation would suggest that the Bank of Canada aims to stabilize output growth in addition to stabilizing the inflation rate. I describe how to detect evidence of these two types of flexibility in the Bank of Canada’s own forecasts (also known as projections) from its quarterly Monetary Policy Report. However, there is little sign of economically significant flexibility between 2003 and 2019.

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)0.019
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 score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.227
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 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public PolicySame topicMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactFrench-language works237,207