MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123717502 · doi:10.34989/swp-1996-4

Overnight Rate Innovations as a Measure of Monetary Policy Shocks in Vector Autoregressions

2021· preprint· en· W3123717502 on OpenAlexaffabout
Walter Engert, Ben Fung, Jamie Armour

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEfficiency Analysis Using DEA
Canadian institutionsBank of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsMonetary policyMeasure (data warehouse)Monetary economicsVector autoregressionEconometricsMacroeconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors examine the Bank of Canada's overnight rate as a measure of monetary policy in vector autoregression (VAR) models. Since the time series of the Bank's current measure of the overnight rate begins only in 1971, the authors splice it to day loan rate observations to obtain a sufficiently long period of data. The resulting series, called Ron, extends back to the 1950s. The authors' analysis yields four findings of interest: First, Ron innovations and innovations of the Bank's current overnight rate measure appear to incorporate virtually identical information about monetary policy shocks. Second, the path of Ron innovations provides a reasonable account of the evolution of monetary policy actions over the past 35 years. Third, shocking Ron in VAR systems has consequences for output, prices and the exchange rate that might be expected from a monetary policy shock. Finally, as a monetary policy variable in these VAR systems, Ron performs at least as well as either the 90-day paper rate or the term spread. The main conclusions are that Ron, the overnight rate variable developed by the authors, provides a good basis for measuring monetary policy actions in VAR-based analysis and that Ron innovations can provide a good measure of monetary policy shocks.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.405
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicEfficiency Analysis Using DEAFrench-language works237,207