MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413128350 · doi:10.1080/14697688.2025.2536611

On the predictive power of food commodity futures prices in forecasting inflation

2025· article· en· W4413128350 on OpenAlexaff
Ankush Agarwal, Christian‐Oliver Ewald, Shuya Zhang, Yihan Zou

Bibliographic record

VenueQuantitative Finance · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFutures contractPredictive powerEconomicsInflation (cosmology)Food pricesCommodityFinancial economicsEconometricsPower (physics)Monetary economicsAgricultureFood securityFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within the context of forecasting U.S. inflation, this study explores the predictive power of food commodities futures prices, focusing on enhancing the precision of both short- and long-term forecasts. We develop single commodity models for twelve different food commodities and also construct two aggregated models: a simple component model and a Principal Component Analysis (PCA)-based model, both utilizing price indices of the selected commodities. Monthly futures data from 1996 to 2023 for the nearest maturity dates are segmented into in-sample fitting and out-of-sample forecasting, covering forecast horizons of 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Our findings indicate that aggregated models, particularly the PCA-based method, exhibit superior forecasting performance. Furthermore, to verify model robustness, we conduct parallel forecasts using spot prices and perform subsample analyses. Collectively, these results underscore the predictive power of commodity futures for forecasting food inflation.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuantitative FinanceSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207