The PRISME model: can disaggregation on the production side help to forecast GDP?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although a forecasting model has very good statistical properties and the mean of the residuals equals zero, it can produce systematic errors during a short period. In the case of regular publications, forecasters want to prevent such a persistence of errors over several periods. For this reason, a safeguard model can be used to inform the forecaster when there is a risk that the standard model (i.e. the best specified model on average) leads to persistent errors over several months or quarters. This paper explains why and how such a safeguard model has been built in order to improve the forecasts of French GDP at the current quarter horizon (nowcasts), which are officially published by the French central bank. The official benchmark model for GDP nowcasts is an aggregated model that relies exclusively on survey in the manufacturing industry. In the long run, this model still has the best performances. On the contrary, the safeguard model is a disaggregated model which features equations for the valued added of 6 sectors. From this example, we provide general remarks on the advantages of disaggregation as well as how such safeguard models can be used in practice.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".