Navigating the confluence of econometrics and data science: Implications for economic analysis and policy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores the transformative integration of econometrics and data science, a synergy poised to redefine empirical research within economics. By merging traditional econometric methods with advanced data science techniques, such as machine learning algorithms and big data analytics, this interdisciplinary approach enables a deeper, more nuanced understanding of complex economic phenomena. We delve into the theoretical foundations underlying this integration, highlighting how machine learning algorithms like random forests and neural networks complement conventional regression analysis, thereby enhancing model complexity and predictive accuracy. The paper further discusses methodological advancements, including handling high-dimensional data, incorporating unstructured data through natural language processing, and the evolution of model selection processes empowered by machine learning. Practical applications are thoroughly examined across three pivotal areas: economic forecasting and policy analysis, financial markets and risk management, and social economic analysis and public policy, showcasing the significant contributions of this convergence to economic forecasting, policy formulation, and the assessment of public interventions. This comprehensive exploration underscores the potential of combining econometrics and data science to offer more precise and actionable insights for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners in the field of economics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.072 | 0.169 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.033 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".