MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122083499

The Terms Of Trade, Productivity Growth And The Current Account

2000· article· en· W3122083499 on OpenAlexaff
Talan İşcan

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsCurrent accountProductivityInvestment (military)Monetary economicsExchange rateCurrent (fluid)Relative priceInternational economicsTerms of tradeMacroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper extends the analytical framework provided by Glick and Rogoff (1995. Journal of Monetary Economics 35, 159-192) to an economy with traded and nontraded goods, and it analyzes the impact of country-specific and global productivity shocks on the current account and investment. Each of these disturbances have different implications for the current account and investment that are largely consistent with the empirical results. First, the current account responds more than investment to country-specific traded productivity growth. Second, global traded productivity and country-specific nontraded productivity growth have no effect on the current account, but they have a significant impact on investment. Third, the global component of nontraded productivity is negligible and has no significant impact on either the current account or investment. In addition, the response of the current account and investment to relative prices (the terms of trade and exchange rate) are insignificant. This paper also discusses the potential reasons for it.

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)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations2
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicGlobal Financial Crisis and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207