MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6965282340 · doi:10.34989/tr-22

Building a Small Macro-Model for Simulation: Some Issues

2024· article· en· W6965282340 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueBank of Canada Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsBank of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstruct (python library)Point (geometry)EstimationValue (mathematics)Term (time)Advice (programming)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Research Department of the Bank of Canada has decided to construct a small annual model of the Canadian economy. This paper presents the reasons for that decision as well as the methodology of the model-builders. The actual structure of the model is not described here; instead, we discuss the relationship of the model to economic theory, the choice of an estimation strategy and the proper use of the model in simulation. We thought it useful to define our preconceptions and biases before proceeding with the construction of the model, and in that way solicit comments and advice from other economists at an early stage in our work. Thus by the very nature of the paper, the views expressed are tentative and preliminary and the text should be taken as a discussion paper rather than as a finished piece. The purpose of the model is not to provide point forecasts but rather to embody as many theoretical insights as possible, especially the longer term properties implied by theory. Keeping the model small will help in ensuring that the structure is consistent with theory and will allow application of systems estimation techniques. The result will, we hope, be a model capable of performing policy simulations over the medium to long term and of describing changes in private sector behaviour that result. It is impossible to give a brief summary of the paper here, but among the topics discussed are our views on the proper treatment of expectations, the value of the 'disequilibrium' concept and the problems of aggregation.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBank of Canada ResearchSame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207