Mean Reversion in Swedish Macroeconomic Time Series - Evidence Using a New Panel Data Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presence or absence of unit roots in a time series can be used to test the validity of a number of economic hypotheses and the persistence of economic time series therefore receives a fair amount of attention. This paper tests for the presence of unit roots in four time series of major interest to the Swedish macro economy. The time series properties of the real exchange rate, the nominal interest rate, inflation and unemployment are investigated using both traditional univariate unit root tests and panel unit root tests in a new panel setting. It is well known that there is power to be gained when testing for unit roots by using a panel setting. By applying two different panel unit root tests - the frequently used Im, Pesaran and Shin (2003) and the less used, but potentially highly informative, Johansen (1988) likelihood ratio test - the drawbacks of panel unit root tests, such as formulation of null and alternative hypothesis and the common assumption of cross-sectional independence, are also addressed in this study. Applying the tests to monthly data from 1972 to 2003, the panel unit root tests provide strong evidence that all four time series are stationary-processes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".