MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7008917535

Currency compositions of international reserves - recent developments

2024· other· en· W7008917535 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueEconstor (Econstor) · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenminbiReserve currencyLiberian dollarCurrencyForeign-exchange reservesCredibilitySpecial drawing rightsUs dollar
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This policy brief presents a new comprehensive dataset on the currency compositions of international reserves of 64 economies from 1996 to 2023. The dataset contains country-specific shares in international reserves for the eight major international currencies, i.e. the United States Dollar (USD), the Euro (EUR), the Japanese Yen (JPY), the British Pound (GBP), the Canadian Dollar (CAD), the Australian Dollar (AUD), the Chinese Yuan or Renminbi (CNY), and the Swiss Franc (CHF). The dataset provides an up-to-date and comprehensive account of publicly available data on the denomination of international reserves, including data on international currencies other than the USD, EUR, JPY, and GBP. While the USD and the EUR remain the dominant global reserve currencies, the data indicate their significance has diminished as countries diversify their reserves. Currencies, including the CNY, have gained prominence, hinting at a gradual fragmentation of the international monetary system. While the USD should retain its leading role in the medium term, ongoing geoeconomic shifts suggest a move towards a multipolar reserve currency landscape. The eventual look of this landscape will depend on the credibility of reserve currency candidates and their ability to retain the characteristics that make them desirable as reserve currencies in the face of future economic and political developments.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.018
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.014

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designObservational
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconstor (Econstor)French-language works237,207