MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4376278467 · doi:10.3390/jrfm16050267

Japanese Economic Performance after the Pandemic: A Sectoral Analysis

2023· article· en· W4376278467 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Willem Thorbecke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Stock (firearms)EconomicsEconomic sectorPandemicStock marketSample (material)BusinessInternational economicsEconomyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 crisis battered the Japanese economy. The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether the pandemic has left scars. To this end, it employs out-of-sample forecasting models and detailed stock market data for 30 sectors and disaggregated current account data for the 3 years after the first case occurred. The findings indicate that stock prices in sectors such as tourism, education, and cosmetics remain far below forecasted values after three years. Office equipment and semiconductor stock prices initially fell more than predicted but have since recovered. Other sectors such as bicycle parts and home appliances gained at first but are now performing as expected. Sectors such as home delivery and electronic entertainment continue to outperform. The results also indicate that income flows from Japanese investments abroad are much larger than forecasted, keeping the Japanese current account in surplus even as imports of oil and commodities have created persistent trade deficits. Since the travails of hard-hit sectors such as tourism reflect their exposure to the COVID-19 pandemic rather than bad choices made by firms, policymakers should consider employing cost-effective ways to stimulate economic activity in these sectors.

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)0.002
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 score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial management→Same topicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts→French-language works237,207→