Bibliographic record
Abstract
The underlying thesis is that inflation does not impact in a significant way stock returns. A stronger thesis is that both domestic and foreign inflation rates are neutral to stock returns. This joint hypothesis is tested for Canada, using 5 theoretical models that describe the determinants of Canadian stock returns. These models range from the most stripped one to the least constrained. All 5 models produce evidence of the strong inflation irrelevance hypothesis for the two key variables, Canadian and foreign (US) inflation rates. Naturally, the largest theoretical model is to be selected for inference purposes. This model includes 12 explanatory variables: 2 inflation rates, 2 proxies for earnings, 2 local duration effects, 2 foreign (US) duration effects, the Canadian/US dollar foreign exchange rate, the price of oil, and two categorical variables that pick up the effect of foreign (US) stock markets. The results show that the model provides sign and size effects in conformity with expectations from the theoretical macroeconomic interrelationships. Hence, the paper, besides documenting inflation neutrality, models in a meaningful manner the determinants of the stock market. All in all the empirical results are largely supportive.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".