MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401165011 · doi:10.59380/crj.vi5.5105

Empirical analysis of the twin deficits hypothesis in the republic of North Macedonia

2024· article· en· W4401165011 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Merale Vehapi, Fatbardha Jonuzi, Florenta Jonuzi

Bibliographic record

VenueCRJ · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsCurrent accountExchange rateDeficit spendingMoney supplyMacroeconomicsQuarter (Canadian coin)Interest rateGovernment (linguistics)Short runGovernment expenditureGovernment budgetBalance of tradeCointegrationMonetary economicsEconometricsPublic financeGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The twin deficits hypothesis is widely considered one of the most frequently employed phenomena in the economic literature. An econometric analysis of the twin deficit hypothesis is of special importance in understanding the perspective on macroeconomic stability in the Republic of North Macedonia. This paper aims to empirically test the validity of this hypothesis in the Republic of North Macedonia. To do so, we utilized quarterly data on Macedonia’s budget deficit, the current account deficit, exchange rate, interest rate, GDP, government expenditure, and money supply, starting from the first quarter of 2001 to the fourth quarter of 2022. Through the application of the ARDL model, the study found that between the variables taken into analysis, there exists a short and long-run relationship. More specifically exchange rate, government expenditure, and GDP result in improvement on the budget deficit, both in the short run and long run. While current account deficit, interest rate, and money supply result in worsening the budget deficit, both in the short run and long run.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCRJSame topicFiscal Policy and Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207