MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399653621 · doi:10.54097/00506568

Predictive Analytics and Macroeconomic Influence: A Detailed Exploration of the Toronto Housing Market Dynamics

2024· article· en· W4399653621 on OpenAlexaffabout
Beiming Yu, Shenyu Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueHighlights in Science Engineering and Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoregressive integrated moving averageDiversification (marketing strategy)Predictive analyticsEconomicsEconometricsAnalyticsFinancial economicsBusinessTime seriesMarketingComputer scienceStatisticsData scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The housing market, serving as a pivotal entity in economic matrices, inherently exhibits a particular complexity. This research sets foot into a comprehensive investigation of the Toronto housing market, unraveling its intertwining associations with macroeconomic variables while attempting to predict future trends based on such exploration. Backed by a robust data set from January 2011 to July 2023 of the Canadian economy, this study employs correlation models (Spearman and Pearson) and ARIMA to generalize and perform housing price predictions. Preliminary findings via correlation analysis signal a substantial linkage between housing prices and macroeconomic indexes of GDP, employment, and exchange rates. The ARIMA model application, underscored by a p-value of approximately 0.042 from the Ljung-Box test, provides a valid, future price estimation. In the intrinsic puzzle of the housing market, this research offers an alternative understanding from a macroscopic lens. This research, while showcasing predictive prowess, also stands as a testament to the multifaceted nature of the housing market and advocates for the ongoing refinement and diversification of predictive models in navigating its complexities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHighlights in Science Engineering and TechnologySame topicHousing Market and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207