MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401379234 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v15n3p54

Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine and Implications for the Ukrainian Hryvnia and the Russian Ruble

2024· article· en· W4401379234 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hoje Jo, Olivia Venderby

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Issues in Ukraine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUkrainianPurchasing power parityGeopoliticsExchange rateEconomicsCurrencyPolitical scienceDevelopment economicsMonetary economicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the interest rates, expected spot rates, and inflation rates of the Ukrainian Hryvnia (₴) to the Russian Ruble (₽). Our methodology analyzes international parity relationships, including Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) and the International Fisher Effect (IFE). Focusing on the four years from two years before Russia’s initial invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, i.e., February 2, 2020 to post-conflict up to December 2023, we hypothesize that the geopolitical tensions induced by the invasion have led to significant fluctuations and high volatility of these currencies. Additionally, we propose that the economic consequences of the invasion, such as disruptions to trade and food and supply shortages, may further affect these variables by increasing domestic and international money financing, therefore triggering higher inflation rates. Our analyses indicate that spot rates predicted using international parity relationships suggest the weakening of the Ukrainian Hryvnia after the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Our findings shed light on the magnitude and direction of currency movements, providing insights into the economic ramifications of the conflict. Specifically, we aim to elucidate how the invasion has impacted the region's exchange rates and economic 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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.693
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicEconomic Issues in UkraineFrench-language works237,207