MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123321768

The predictive power of the Senior Loan Officer Survey: do lending officers know anything special?

2006· preprint· en· W3123321768 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thomas J. Cunningham

Bibliographic record

VenueEconstor (Econstor) · 2006
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBanking stability, regulation, efficiency
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)LoanOfficerPredictive powerGross domestic productWork (physics)Product (mathematics)BusinessPanel surveyPower (physics)EconomicsAccountingActuarial scienceDemographic economicsFinanceEngineeringEconomic growthPolitical scienceGeographyMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The answer to this question is yes, but not that much about banks. Every quarter the Federal Reserve System surveys a panel of senior loan officers at major banks across the nation. The results of this survey have been found in previous studies to provide useful information in predicting gross domestic product. This paper extends that work, finding that sector-specific survey results are relevant for predicting real activity in those sectors but, strangely, that the informative power of the survey results only marginally extend to various measures of performance in the banking sector.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.223
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 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

Citations9
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconstor (Econstor)Same topicBanking stability, regulation, efficiencyFrench-language works237,207