MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125079103 · doi:10.1111/rssa.12213

Heads I win; Tails you lose: Asymmetry in Exchange rate Pass-through into Import Prices

2016· article· en· W3125079103 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Raphael Brun-Aguerre, Ana-Marı́a Fuertes, Matthew Greenwood‐Nimmo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (Statistics in Society) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsExchange-rate pass-throughMonetary economicsCurrencyQuarter (Canadian coin)Exchange rateLiberalizationWelfareMarket powerInternational economicsMicroeconomicsMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary We analyse exchange rate pass-through into import prices for a large group of 33 emerging and developed economies from 1980, quarter 1, to 2010, quarter 4. Our error correction models permit asymmetric pass-through for currency appreciations and depreciations over three horizons of interest: on impact, in the short run and in the long run. We find that depreciations are typically passed through more strongly than appreciations in the long run, suggesting that exporters may exert a degree of long-run pricing power. This asymmetry is stronger in economies which are more import dependent but is moderated by freedom to trade and a positive output gap. Given that this pass-through asymmetry is welfare reducing for consumers in the destination market, a key macroeconomic implication is that import-dependent economies, in particular, can benefit from trade liberalization.

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)0.009
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations60
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (Statistics in Society)Same topicMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactFrench-language works237,207