MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155651208 · doi:10.34989/san-2021-5

Assessing global potential output growth and the US neutral rate: April 2021

2021· article· en· W3155651208 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas J. Carter, Xin Scott Chen, Ali Jaffery, Christopher Hajzler, Jonathan Lachaine, Peter Shannon, Subrata Sarker, Graeme Westwood, Beiling Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueStaff Analytical Notes · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEconomic and Technological Developments in Russia
Canadian institutionsBank of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPotential outputRange (aeronautics)Growth rateEconomicsEnvironmental scienceMathematicsMonetary economicsEngineeringMonetary policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We expect global potential output growth to rise to 3 percent by 2022. Relative to the last assessment in October 2020, potential output growth has been revised up across all the regions. The range of the US neutral rate remains unchanged relative to the autumn 2020 assessment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.280 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueStaff Analytical NotesSame topicEconomic and Technological Developments in RussiaFrench-language works237,207