MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of the Hypothesis of Nonlinear Relationship between Finance and Energy Investment

2022· book-chapter· en· W4210640993 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mir Sayed Shah Danish

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicEnergy and Environmental Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInflation (cosmology)EconomicsInvestment (military)Monetary economicsEconomic stabilityFinancial sector developmentMonetary policyFinanceMacroeconomicsFinancial sectorPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Because of the consequences of changes in inflation, which affect the behavior of economic agents, the banking system, and the size of investments, high inflation provokes investors to withdraw funds from long-term projects and invest them in the banking sector. This effect reduces potential economic growth. In turn, the low level of inflation, which persists for a sufficient time interval of several years, indicates the stability of the national economy and attracts external and internal investors, contributes to economic growth. Based on this, it can be assumed that the presence of this relationship will be observed when analyzing data from national economies. Therefore, we can distinguish several hypotheses: inflation has a certain relationship with the indicator of financial development (h1); Inflation and financial development have a nonlinear relationship (h2); monetary policy implemented in the state can have a positive impact on the indicators of financial development, which will affect the dynamics of economic growth (h3). For this purpose, a sample was made from five countries: Germany, United States, Canada, China, Japan, and also Russia was selected in addition to them. This group of countries describes different aspects of the financial sector, as well as the level of economic development, so it will allow you to test hypotheses on a sufficient number of examples. The set of macroeconomic indicators of these countries is sufficiently studied, so it was easily amenable to econometric analysis.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy and Environmental SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207