MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6947107078 · doi:10.34989/swp-2024-10

Forecasting Recessions in Canada: An Autoregressive Probit Model Approach

2024· article· en· W6947107078 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueEconstor (Econstor) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsBank of Canada
FundersRoyal Economic Society
KeywordsAutoregressive modelProbitProbit modelAutocorrelationRecessionModel selectionMultivariate probit modelVariety (cybernetics)Variable (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We forecast recessions in Canada using an autoregressive (AR) probit model. In this model, the presence of the lagged latent variable, which captures the autocorrelation in the recession binary variable, results in an intractable likelihood with a high dimensional integral. Therefore, we employ composite likelihood methods to facilitate the estimation of this complex model, and we provide their asymptotic results. We perform a variable selection procedure on a large variety of Canadian and foreign macro-financial variables by using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) as the performance criterion. Our findings suggest that the AR model meaningfully improves the ability to forecast Canadian recessions, relative to a variety of probit models proposed in the Canadian literature. These results are robust to changes in the performance criteria or the sample considered. Our findings also highlight the short-term predictive power of US economic activity and suggest that financial indicators are reliable predictors of Canadian recessions.

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)0.005
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.146 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconstor (Econstor)Same topicMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactFrench-language works237,207