The Causal Relationship between Unemployment and Inflation in G6 Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unemployment and inflation are major problems in macroeconomics. While solving the unemployment problem is a priority for some governments, for others it is bringing inflation under control. Unemployment and inflation surface are two undesirable problems for economies. Governments of countries implement monetary and fiscal policies suited to their aims to solve these problems. The Group 6 (G6) states are countries that have influence in steering the policies of international institutions. In this regard, this study investigated whether there is a relationship between the inflation rate and unemployment in nine randomly selected G6 countries (Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the Russian Federation, Turkey, and the United Kingdom), using data from the period 2009–2017 and applying a panel causality test. According to the Granger causality test, there is a unidirectional causality from inflation rate to unemployment rate. According to the results of the research, bringing inflation under control in these countries is becoming a prior goal. As a result of the policies to bring the inflation under control, the demand for goods and services in the economy decreases. As the aggregate demand for goods and services in the economy decreases, the demand for the workforce decreases as well. In macroeconomic policies there is a relationship between inflation and unemployment. While unemployment increases inflation decreases and while unemployment decreases inflation increases. Our research results also support this. When inflation is intended to be brought under control, it causes unemployment in the economy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".