CONSIDERATION RELATING THE THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL FRAMEWORK OF THE MONETARY UNION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For the first time in economic theory, the canadian economist Robert Mundel (1961)signaled the fact that countries with close trade links and with similar economic cycles could benefit major advantages using a common currency by reducing transaction costs and eliminating currency risk. Labor mobility within the region, and active policies of the government to create jobs where unemployment is high, can be a substitute for quitting floating exchange rate and loss of the right to set interest rate level allowed by independent monetary policy. Mundell says that in addition, when economic cycles are not perfect aligned and common monetary policy can not act with the same intensity stabilizing across the region, there must be set up mechanisms for fiscal transfers: collection of fees from an area of growth and their transfer in an area in recession. The idea of a single coin for Europe began to emerge in 1979 when the European Monetary System was founded. Subsequently, in 1999, euro, the single currency of the euro area for eleven European Member States at that time, was launched. The concept of Mundell has literally become the starting point for a new field of research, the problem of forming an optimum currency area has been seen as a new theoretical basis for adjustments to asymmetric shocks, ie to exogenous factors that produce significant disturbances within a region or countries.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".