MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3199312364 · doi:10.3390/jrfm14090448

Do Inflation Expectations Matter for Small, Open Economies? Empirical Evidence from the Solomon Islands

2021· article· en· W3199312364 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Angeline B. Rohoia, Parmendra Sharma

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsPhillips curveInflation (cosmology)New Keynesian economicsKeynesian economicsSmall open economyInflation targetingOutput gapMonetary policyMacroeconomicsEconometricsEconomyMonetary economicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the role of inflation expectations in Solomon Islands, a Pacific Island Country, using the Hybrid New Keynesian Phillips Curve model. The study applies the Generalized Method of Moments to estimate the Hybrid New Keynesian Philips Curve model using quarterly time series data for the period 2003–2017. The study confirms the existence of a Hybrid New Keynesian Philips Curve for Solomon Islands and finds that both backward-looking and forward-looking processes matter for inflation. Fuel prices and output gap are important indicators of current inflation. The study highlights key areas to further investigate including the weak monetary transmission mechanism and to examine the exchange rate pass through effect onto domestic prices. Studies on the role of inflation expectations in small, open, economies of the Pacific, such as Solomon Islands, is limited. This paper fills this void in literature by using quarterly time-series data to build a Hybrid New Keynesian Philips Curve model for Solomon Islands.

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)0.005
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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial management→Same topicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact→French-language works237,207→