Bibliographic record
Abstract
I propose a modified implementation of the popular Hamilton filter, to make the cyclical component extracted from an aggregate variable consistent with the aggregation of the cyclical components extracted from its underlying variables. This procedure is helpful in many circumstances, for instance when dealing with a variable that comes from a definition or when the empirical relationship is based on an equilibrium condition of a growth model. The procedure consists of the following steps: 1) build the aggregate variable, 2) run the Hamilton filter regression on the aggregate variable and store the related OLS estimates, 3) use these estimated parameters to predict the trends of all the underlying variables, 4) rescale the constant terms to obtain mean-zero cyclical components that are aggregation-consistent. I consider two applications, exploiting U.S. and Canadian data. The former is based on the GDP expenditure components, while the latter on the GDP of its Provinces and Territories. I find sizable differences between the cyclical components of aggregate GDP computed with and without the adjustment, making it a valuable procedure for both assessing the output gap and validating empirically DSGE models.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".