MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7135769423

The comparison of success of monetary policy based on inflation targeting in case of central banks of Canada and the Czech Republic.

2011· dissertation· cs· W7135769423 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Samy Metrah

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature) · 2011
Typedissertation
Languagecs
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInflation targetingMonetary policyCzechInterest rateInflation (cosmology)Central bankAnticipation (artificial intelligence)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the bachelor's thesis is to compare the features of monetary policy based on inflation targeting and its implementation in the Czech Republic and Canada. The comparison is made in two different points of view -- both the qualitative and the quantitative. The first compares the main instruments of monetary policy used by both central banks. The other analyzes the rate of success in fulfillment of pre-determined targets for short-term interest rates and inflation; it also provides the possible explanation of deviations. The results confirmed that both central banks have strong influence on behavior and movements of short-term interest rates. In case of CNB the results imply possible movements of short-term interest rates based on anticipation of near future changes in monetary policy instrument. The rate of success in fulfillment of inflation targets was considerably better in case of Bank of Canada; however, the worse performance of CNB in comparison to Bank of Canada was primarily based on extraordinary shocks that had hit the Czech economy.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.227
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature)→Same topicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact→French-language works237,207→