MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100271809

The Tandem Movement of Natural Resource Price and the Price of the Loonie: An Empirical Analysis

2007· article· en· W7100271809 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicNatural Resources and Economic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExchange rateNatural resourceRevenuePrice indexResource (disambiguation)Index (typography)Producer price indexRegression analysisResource depletion
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The views expressed in this paper are those of the author, and Statistics Canada is not responsible for them. Abstract: Canada is a net exporter of natural resources such as oil and gas and gold. In recent years, the movement between the natural resource prices and the exchange rate has been widely reported in the media. However, there is a lack of empirical analysis regarding this movement. This paper discusses the magnitude of this movement by linking a newly created natural resource price index and the exchange rate. Currently, Statistics Canada compiles annual data on production and sales revenues of a number of natural resources. Using these data from 1974 to 2006, a chained Fisher price index of natural resources is calculated. A regression model is used to examine the variation in the exchange rate due to the resource price growth along with other key variables. The augmented Dickey-Fuller test is conducted to examine the stationarity of these variables. The Johansen cointegation test demonstrates that there is a long run relationship between the exchange rate and the resource price index. Finally, the regression analysis reveals that the coefficient of the resource price index is statistically significant. 1

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNatural Resources and Economic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207