MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366962223 · doi:10.33423/jabe.v25i1.5996

Estimating the Impact of China’s Central Bank Intervention on the RMB/US$ Exchange Rate Misalignment

2023· article· en· W4366962223 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Zuohong Pan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Business and Economics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenminbiEndogeneityExchange rateEconomicsError correction modelSample (material)ChinaQuarter (Canadian coin)Monetary economicsEconometricsIntervention (counseling)Central bankEffective exchange rateMonetary policyCointegrationGeographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper studies the misalignment path of the RMB/US$ exchange rate, focusing on the managed floating period since July 2005 and determining the impact of the central bank’s intervention on the RMB/US$ misalignment. We adopt the permanent-and-transitory component decomposition approach developed by Gonzalo and Granger (1995) to estimate the equilibrium RMB/US$ rate and its misalignment within a vector error correction model (VECM). The sample for our study is the quarterly data on the exchange rate and some fundamental variables for the US and China between the 1st quarter of 2000 and the 2nd quarter of 2020. The results show a trend of the RMB/US$ reducing its undervaluation during the sample period, going from 41% to 35%. The government intervention substantially increased the RMB undervaluation, from an average of 5% to 39% without accounting for the weak exogeneity of the intervention, but to 25.8% after accounting for the exogeneity.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Business and EconomicsSame topicMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactFrench-language works237,207