MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408138483 · doi:10.1016/j.jeca.2025.e00410

The macroeconomic impact of asymmetric uncertainty shocks

2025· article· en· W4408138483 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Holger Müller, Boris Blagov, Torsten C. Schmidt, Jonas Rieger, Carsten Jentsch

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Economic Asymmetries · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsMacroeconomicsEconometricsMonetary economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Political shocks impact the economy in different ways, depending of their nature. To capture these effects effectively, we present the Uncertainty Perception Indicator (UPI) based on German newspaper content. This approach combines the time-inherent stability of simple counts of articles with the thematic openness and flexibility of topic models. Using the dynamic RollingLDA technique facilitates the close-to-real-time identification of both the magnitude of an uncertainty shock and its specific characteristics. Hence, the UPI could prove highly useful for economic forecasters and policymakers, since it renders possible more timely and targeted policy reactions. Employing a Bayesian VAR approach, we analyze the effects of various UPI shocks on fixed investment and other macroeconomic variables. Our results document the asymmetric nature of uncertainty shocks, as their consequences are dependent on the respective sources of uncertainty. We find that international shocks only have weak effects on the German macroeconomy, while domestic policy shocks prove to be highly significant. These results markedly differ from earlier studies that, in the case of Germany, tend to maintain the opposite.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Economic AsymmetriesSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207