MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414540480 · doi:10.3138/cpp.2024-021

Risk Scenarios and Macroeconomic Impacts: Insights for Canadian Policy

2025· article· en· W4414540480 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Kevin Moran, Dalibor Stevanović, Stéphane Surprenant

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Policy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsBank of CanadaUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonetary policyOil priceStructural vector autoregressionVector autoregressionBaseline (sea)Transmission channelIndustrial productionProduction (economics)Oil production

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article analyzes the macroeconomic implications of risk scenarios for the Canadian economy using a vector autoregressive model. We focus on three scenarios: an aggressive monetary policy easing, an unexpected rise in oil prices, and a sudden slowdown in US economic activity. By illustrating how these scenarios would cause the economy to deviate from baseline macroeconomic forecasts, we demonstrate the value for policy-makers of assessing the potential outcomes of key shocks through this type of analysis. We highlight the varied impacts of these shocks—for example, the sensitivity of industrial production and housing markets to monetary easing, the demand-driven gains from rising oil prices, and the contractionary effects of a US recession. Structural decomposition reveals how specific shocks shape economic outcomes, offering insights into their transmission mechanisms. These findings underscore the importance of incorporating conditional forecasts into policy discussions to better understand the potential risks facing the Canadian economy.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.229
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public PolicySame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207