MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6909051289 · doi:10.34989/swp-2022-51

CANVAS: A Canadian Behavioral Agent-Based Model

2022· article· en· W6909051289 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueIIASA PURE (International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicComplex Systems and Time Series Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoBank of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInflation (cosmology)Consumption (sociology)Discrete choiceProjection (relational algebra)Macroeconomic modelEconomic modelBenchmark (surveying)Production (economics)Class (philosophy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Economic models are valuable to central banks for conducting projection and policy analysis. The Bank of Canada’s current economic projection relies mainly on two complementary large-scale models—the Terms-of-Trade Economic Model (ToTEM) and the Large Empirical and Semi-structural model (LENS). However, introducing both household and firm differences at detailed levels and realistic behavior in these models can be challenging, both in theory and in practice. In this paper, we contribute to the development of Bank’s next generation of models with CANVAS, a Canadian behavioral agent-based model. We simulate individual behaviours of many different agents to provide an overall picture of the Canadian economy. CANVAS improves on earlier models in three ways: introducing household and firm differences at individual level, moving beyond rational expectations by incorporating realistic behaviours of real people and business, and modelling the Canadian production network. Finer details of difference (on demographic data like sex, age, occupation, and household balance sheets) can help policy-makers understand households’ consumption and employment decisions. By modelling the strategic price setting behaviour of individual firms with the lab and survey evidence, we also capture inflation dynamics through factors such as demand, supply, and expectation. The network structure in CANVAS connects agents’ different characteristics and their behaviour, putting it among the first class of macroeconomic agent-based models that can compete with benchmark models in out-of-sample forecasting performance. These features make CANVAS a distinct complement to the current models, with greater ability for forecasting and policy analysis.

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.002

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.190 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIIASA PURE (International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis)Same topicComplex Systems and Time Series AnalysisFrench-language works237,207