MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Forecasting urban unemployment rate in China using ARIMA model

2024· article· en· W4404048327 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTheoretical and Natural Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional Economic and Spatial Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoregressive integrated moving averageEconometricsUnemployment rateChinaUnemploymentStatisticsEconomicsMathematicsTime seriesGeographyMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The urban unemployment rate is a significant economic indicator that has long drawn researchers’ interest. Monitoring and predicting changes in the unemployment rate can help in understanding economic trends and implementing appropriate measures. This article aims to forecast urban unemployment rates in China. By collecting previous surveyed urban unemployment rates in China, this article will generate and compare various ARIMA models in order to identify the one with the best forecasting accuracy. The forecast results of the selected model state that the unemployment rate will remain almost unchanged, around 5%, in the second half of 2024 and throughout 2025. Fluctuations are expected to be between 0.01% and 0.03%. The number is much lower than the peak during the pandemic, but it is still above the historical average. This article argues that China’s economy is gradually stabilizing, and the post-pandemic measures have been effective but are still insufficient. The government still needs to implement additional actions.

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.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.621
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.208 · 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