MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3123996696

Financial Market Integration, Exchange Rate Policy, and the Dynamics of Business and Employment in Korea

2015· preprint· en· W3123996696 on OpenAlexaff
Matteo Cacciatore, Fabio Ghironi, Yurim Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExchange rateFinancial integrationFinancial marketVolatility (finance)EconomicsUnemploymentMonetary economicsInternational financeInternational economicsBusinessFinanceMacroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the consequences of different degrees of international financial market integration and exchange rate policies in a calibrated, medium-scale model of the Korean economy. The model features endogenous producer entry into domestic and export markets and search-and-matching frictions in labor markets. This allows us to highlight the consequences of financial integration and the exchange rate regime for the dynamics of business creation and unemployment. We show that, under flexible exchange rates, access to international financial markets increases the volatility of both business creation and the number of exporting plants, but the effects on employment volatility are more modest. Pegging the exchange rate can have unfavorable consequences for the effects of terms of trade appreciation, but more financial integration is beneficial under a peg if the economy is subject to both productivity and terms of trade shocks. The combination of a floating exchange rate and internationally complete markets would be the best scenario for Korea among those we focus on.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics→Same topicGlobal trade and economics→French-language works237,207→