MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122291774 · doi:10.1257/mac.4.2.153

Rebalancing Frequency and the Welfare Cost of Inflation

2012· preprint· en· W3122291774 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
André C. Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Economic Journal Macroeconomics · 2012
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic theories and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsFriedman ruleInflation (cosmology)BondWelfareFixed costFixed incomeMonetary economicsFixed exchange ratesBenchmark (surveying)Quarter (Canadian coin)CashMonetary policyEconometricsMicroeconomicsMacroeconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cash-in-advance models usually require agents to reallocate money and bonds in fixed periods. Every month or quarter, for example. I show that fixed periods underestimate the welfare cost of inflation. I use a model in which agents choose how often they exchange bonds for money. In the benchmark specification, the welfare cost of 10 percent instead of 0 inflation increases from 0.1 percent of income with fixed periods to 1 percent with optimal periods. The results are robust to different preferences, to different compositions of income in bonds or money, and to the introduction of capital and labor. (JEL: E30, E40, E50)

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Economic Journal MacroeconomicsSame topicEconomic theories and modelsFrench-language works237,207