MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124177668 · doi:10.1093/rfs/hhv041

Wage Rigidity: A Quantitative Solution to Several Asset Pricing Puzzles

2015· article· en· W3124177668 on OpenAlexaff
Jack Favilukis, Xiaoji Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Financial Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWageCapital asset pricing modelRigidity (electromagnetism)EconomicsManagementFinancial economicsEngineeringLabour economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In standard production models, wage volatility is far too high, and equity volatility is far too low. A simple modification–sticky wages because of infrequent resetting together with a constant elasticity of substitution (CES) production function leads to both smoother wages and higher equity volatility. Further, the model produces several other hard-to-explain features of financial data: high Sharpe ratios, low and smooth interest rates, time-varying equity volatility and premium, a value premium, and a downward-sloping equity term structure. Procyclical, volatile wages are a hedge for firms in standard models; smoother wages act like operating leverage, making profits and dividends riskier. Received July 30, 2013; accepted July 6, 2015 by Editor Geert Bekaert.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 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

Citations219
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Financial StudiesSame topicFinancial Markets and Investment StrategiesFrench-language works237,207