MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3116578237 · doi:10.1079/9781789248234.0174

A global vector autoregression model for softwood lumber trade.

2020· book-chapter· en· W3116578237 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fatemeh Mokhtarzadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueCABI eBooks · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVector autoregressionEconomicsShock (circulatory)SoftwoodAutoregressive modelEconometricsInternational economicsEngineeringPulp and paper industry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<title>Abstract</title> A novel econometric approach is developed in this chapter, namely, the Global Vector Autoregressive (GVAR) model. It provides a comprehensive framework for analyzing the country-level impacts of various domestic, foreign, and/or global shocks on softwood lumber trade. The GVAR approach is applied to Canada-U.S. trade in softwood lumber and used to analyze the effect of external shocks on Canadian lumber prices. Findings indicate that Canada's export prices are positively correlated to U.S. housing starts and real GDP. Further, using impulse response functions, it is used to examine the effects on regional lumber export prices in Canada of: (1) a change in U.S. housing starts; (2) a reduction in U.S. GDP by one standard deviation; (3) a COVID-19 induced decline in U.S. GDP (of three standard deviations); (4) an increase in global oil prices; and, in the Appendix, (5) an increase in the long-term interest rate. Price impacts vary a great deal by Canadian region depending on the type of shock, with the propagation mechanism in Alberta significantly different from that in other regions. For example, with an oil price shock and because Alberta is a major exporter of oil, the lumber export price remains high even as the shock dissipates over time.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.314
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.216 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCABI eBooksSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207