La zone monétaire optimale en Amérique du Nord
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jusqu’à présent, de nombreuses recherches ont été menées sur l’union monétaire. Il existe toujours des discussions sur l’adoption d’une monnaie commune entre le Canada et les États-Unis. Dans l’article publié par Jack L. Carr et John E. Floyd (2002) [1], ils font des analyses de régression pour déterminer si des fluctuations des taux de change sont à cause de chocs monétaires ou de chocs réels. Cela eux aide à déterminer la possibilité de former la zone monétaire optimale entre le Canada et les États-Unis. Ce mémoire revisite les méthodologies de Carr et Floyd (2002) en ajoutant des données de 1999 à 2018. Nous refaisons des analyses de régression et versifions que si l’argument de Carr et Floyd (2002) est plus fort un moins fort.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 it