MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123673486 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v12n3p162

Five Years of Inflation Targeting Without Economic Growth: What Should Be Changed? The Case of Russia

2021· article· en· W3123673486 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Oscar Gasanov

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExchange rateEconomicsInflation (cosmology)Monetary economicsMarket liquidityMonetary policyInterest rateEconomic stabilityGeopoliticsInflation targetingInternational economicsMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article provides a review of approaches to assessing and analyzing the effectiveness of the interest rate and exchange rate policy of the Bank of Russia in the period 2015-2019. Despite the decrease in the rate of price growth, inflationary expectations of economic agents remain at a high level. Monetary policy continues to be tight. The stability of the exchange rate to external shocks, expected from the introduction of inflation targeting and a free floating rate, did not happen. The complex of conditions that have developed due to geopolitical factors, low growth rates and the global economic crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic require the search for new targets, such as economic growth and exchange rate stability. To maintain the stability of the ruble exchange rate, it is recommended to sell foreign exchange reserves accumulated according to the "Budget rule" in an equivalent amount; to support the liquidity of banks during periods of an attack on the ruble, it should through foreign exchange REPO, and develop a derivatives market.

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)0.005
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicGlobal Financial Crisis and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207