MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7055746062

Comparative Analysis of Causality and Cointegration Relations Between Stock Market and Economic Growth in G7 and BRICS Countries and Turkey

2019· article· en· W7055746062 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDergiPark (Istanbul University) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGross domestic productCointegrationGranger causalityStock (firearms)Real gross domestic productStock marketMeasures of national income and outputGross domestic incomeQuarter (Canadian coin)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The economic growth in a country isgenerally measured by a change in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Theincrease in GDP will also increase per capita national income and personalsavings. The increase in the national income will also increase individuals'available income, their savings and the share of their savings on investments.Hence, GDP is one of the most important indicators considered by investors. Inthis study, it was attempted to test the relationship between these twovariables and the findings of previous studies. For this purpose, therelationships between GDPs and stock markets of the BRICS and G7 countries fromthe 1st quarter of 1998 to 4th quarter of 2016 were examined. The Johansencointegration test and the Granger Causality test were used to determine theexistence of a relationship. As a result of the analyzes made, one-wayrelations from stock indices to GDP were found. At the same time, the seriesare moving together in the long run. Therefore, the increase in stock prices isaccompanied by economic growth.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDergiPark (Istanbul University)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207