Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is widespread agreement that during the floating exchange rate period from 1970 to the present Canada’s nominal and real exchange rates with respect to the United States have shown considerable volatility. It has been suggested that the volatility of the real exchange rate would be substantially reduced if the nominal exchange rate with the U.S. dollar were fixed, either through a permanent fixed exchange rate mechanism or the adoption of a common North American currency. In all discussions of the fixed verses floating exchange rate question, it is important to understand why real exchange rates are volatile. The sources of real exchange rate volatility are the focus of this paper. Our findings are that substantial asymmetric real shocks have occurred and were an important determinant of the real exchange rate but there is no evidence of real exchange rate effects of monetary shocks. Since our results indicate that the sources of exchange rate volatility are real, not monetary, they are unfavorable to the adoption by Canada of a common currency with the United States. Classification codes: open economy macroeconomics, international monetary arrangements and institutions, financial aspects of economic integration. We would like to thank Angelo Melino, Allan Hynes and two anonymous referees for helpful comments. ii
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.003 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".