Macroeconomic Predictions Using Payments Data and Machine Learning
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper assesses the usefulness of comprehensive payments data for macroeconomic predictions in Canada. Specifically, we evaluate which type of payments data are useful, when they are useful, why they are useful, and whether machine learning (ML) models enhance their predictive value. We find payments data with a factor model can help improve accuracy up to 25% in predicting GDP, retail, and wholesale sales; and nonlinear ML models can further improve the accuracy up to 20%. Furthermore, we find the retail payments data are more useful than the data from the wholesale system; and they add more value during crisis and at the nowcasting horizon due to the timeliness. The contribution of the payments data and ML models is small and linear during low and normal economic growth periods. However, their contribution is large, asymmetrical, and nonlinear during crises such as COVID-19. Moreover, we propose a cross-validation approach to mitigate overfitting and use tools to overcome interpretability in the ML models to improve their effectiveness for policy use.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it