MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244728921 · doi:10.1353/eca.2001.0001

Editors' Summary

2001· article· en· W4244728921 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
William C. Brainard, George Perry

Bibliographic record

VenueBrookings Papers on Economic Activity · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecessionQuarter (Canadian coin)EconomicsBalance of paymentsLiberian dollarIndex (typography)Financial crisisPortfolioCapital (architecture)Monetary economicsMacroeconomicsFinanceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Editors' Summary William C. Brainard and George L. Perry The brookings panel on Economic Activity held its seventy-first conference in Washington, D.C., on March 29 and 30, 2001. This issue of Brookings Papers on Economic Activity includes the papers and discussions presented at the conference. The first paper investigates the causes of the Russian financial crisis of 1998 and evaluates the emergency international effort that was undertaken to avert the crisis. The second paper studies the effect of interstate wage differences on the location decisions of immigrants and estimates the resulting gains in macroeconomic efficiency. The first report analyzes whether the decreased frequency of recessions in the past two decades can be attributed to a secular decline in the variability of quarter-to-quarter changes in output. The second report examines the usefulness of the Index of Consumer Sentiment as a tool for forecasting recessions. The issue concludes with a symposium of three papers on the sustainability of the recent large current account deficits in the U.S. balance of payments. Each takes a somewhat different approach to understanding these deficits. The first symposium paper sees U.S. assets as attractive investments that are likely to perpetuate large capital account surpluses. The second focuses on entrenched global demand for the dollar as international money. The third paper views capital flows in terms of a country portfolio model in which investors at home and abroad increase or reduce their holdings of U.S. assets in response to changes in wealth and in risk-adjusted returns. In the summer of 1998 the flight of capital from Russia in the face of failed attempts by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and others to stabilize the ruble caused a crisis that reverberated throughout the world's financial markets. The IMF had sought to avoid the inflation and financial market disruption that a sharp devaluation might bring and to encourage [End Page ix] and facilitate fiscal and structural reforms within Russia. When the effort failed, inflation soared, output declined, and the reformist government of Prime Minister Sergei Kirienko fell. The Russian meltdown was followed by sharp declines in stock markets worldwide; it also led to massive losses at Long Term Capital Management, a large U.S.-based hedge fund, whose potential failure U.S. authorities and other knowledgeable observers saw as a threat to the financial system. In the first paper of this issue, Homi Kharas, Brian Pinto, and Sergei Ulatov analyze the Russian crisis and the response of the international community. The authors first review the economic situation in Russia in the years leading up to the crisis. The policy of stabilizing the exchange rate around a crawling peg had helped bring annual inflation down from 200 percent in 1994 to near 10 percent in 1997. But otherwise performance had been dismal. National output, which had fallen by 40 percent between 1990 and 1995, continued to stagnate or decline over the next two years. And Russia's financial situation worsened after the East Asian crisis started in the summer of 1997. In the first half of that year, foreign investment in Russian equities and government short-term debt had risen sharply, raising the foreign reserves of the Central Bank of Russia (CBR) to $25 billion by July. But by the fall, some of the capital inflows had reversed and interest rates on GKOs (short-term government debt instruments) were rising. Under pressure from the IMF, the government formulated a new Fiscal Action Plan designed to increase tax collection and control expenditure. In subsequent months such commitments to reform would be repeated in the face of growing skepticism about the government's ability to deliver on them. And by the late spring of 1998, in an environment of rising interest rates and falling oil prices, the third and final bout of instability began, coincident with the crisis in Indonesia. The international financial community reacted forcefully. In June 1998 the IMF released a $670 million tranche of a previously negotiated loan, and in July an IMF-led rescue package totaling $22.6 billion was announced, with funds committed mainly from the IMF and the World Bank but including $1.5 billion from the government...

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.630
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.203 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrookings Papers on Economic ActivitySame topicGlobal Financial Crisis and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207