MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414142751 · doi:10.3390/ijfs13030170

Predicting the Canadian Yield Curve Using Machine Learning Techniques

2025· article· en· W4414142751 on OpenAlex
Ali Rayeni, H Naderi

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLasso (programming language)Yield curveYield (engineering)HyperparameterFeature (linguistics)Set (abstract data type)Government (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study applies machine learning methods to predict the Canadian yield curve using a comprehensive set of macroeconomic variables. Lagged values of the yield curve and a wide array of Canadian and international macroeconomic variables are utilized across various machine learning models. Hyperparameters are estimated to minimize mispricing across government bonds with different maturities. The Group Lasso algorithm outperforms the other models studied, followed by Lasso. In addition, the majority of the models outperform the Random Walk benchmark. The feature importance analysis reveals that oil prices, bond-related factors, labor market conditions, banks’ balance sheets, and manufacturing-related factors significantly drive yield curve predictions. This study is one of the few that uses such a broad array of macroeconomic variables to examine Canadian macro-level outcomes. It provides valuable insights for policymakers and market participants, with its feature importance analysis highlighting key drivers of the yield curve.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.506
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.245 · 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