MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391387993 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v16n3p42

Optimal Capital Account Openness in China

2024· article· en· W4391387993 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wenyun Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCredit Risk and Financial Regulations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpenness to experienceChinaCapital (architecture)EconomicsMonetary economicsPolitical scienceHistoryPsychologyAncient historyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper measures the degree of capital account openness and financial stability index, and uses GDP to represent economic development. Recent research mainly focuses on the qualitative research of capital account openness on financial stability and economic development. This paper tries to find the optimal degree of capital account openness based on current economic structure and financial situation through quantitative methods. I use Kalman filter to measure the degree of capital account openness based on the interest rate parity theory and defines the degree of capital account openness as λ, the range of λ is [0, 1]. For the measurement of financial stability, this paper adopts principal component analysis method, and selects 17 groups of data related to financial stability to measure it. Based on these two sets of figures, as well as monthly GDP data, establishes TVAR model, studies the impulse response graph, and determines the impact on financial stability index, GDP and λ. This paper uses support vector machine regression (SVR) to quantitatively analyze the relationship among capital account openness, economic development, and financial stability.

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicCredit Risk and Financial RegulationsFrench-language works237,207