MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122040988 · doi:10.3386/w22825

Putting the Cycle Back into Business Cycle Analysis

2016· article· en· W3122040988 on OpenAlexafffund
Paul Beaudry, Dana Galizia, Franck Portier

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Bureau of Economic Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Theory and Policy
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaEuropean Commission
KeywordsBusiness cycleEconomicsLimit cycleBoomEconometricsLimit (mathematics)Dynamic stochastic general equilibriumInferenceUnemploymentKeynesian economicsStatistical physicsMacroeconomicsMathematicsComputer sciencePhysicsMonetary policyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper begins by re-examining the spectral properties of several cyclically sensitive variables such as hours worked, unemployment and capacity utilization.For each of these series, we document the presence of an important peak in the spectral density at a periodicity of approximately 36-40 quarters.We take this pattern as suggestive of intriguing but little-studied cyclical phenomena at the long end of the business cycle, and we ask how best to explain it.In particular, we explore whether such patterns may reflect slow-moving limit cycle forces, wherein booms sow the seeds of the subsequent busts.To this end, we present a general class of models, featuring local complementarities, that can give rise to unique-equilibrium behavior characterized by stochastic limit cycles.We then use the framework to extend a New Keynesian-type model in a manner aimed at capturing the notion of an accumulation-liquidation cycle.We estimate the model by indirect inference and find that the cyclical properties identified in the data can be well explained by stochastic limit cycles forces, where the exogenous disturbances to the system are very short lived.This contrasts with results from most other macroeconomic models, which typically require very persistent shocks in order to explain macroeconomic fluctuations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.188
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Bureau of Economic ResearchSame topicEconomic Theory and PolicyFrench-language works237,207