最优通胀率：一项元分析
Optimal Inflation Rate: A Meta-Analysis
浏览论文内容
中文总结 AI 辅助
该研究通过LLM辅助的可重复元分析，利用777项估计值发现最优长期通胀率约为0.6个百分点，远低于多数央行的2%目标，且明确了研究间差异的核心驱动因素。
中文摘要 AI 辅助
我们利用1989年至2026年间发表的116项基础研究中的777项估计值，重新探讨最优长期通胀率，这是该主题迄今为止最大的样本。据我们所知，这是首批经济学元分析研究之一，其中基础数据提取全程通过有记录且可审计的大语言模型（LLM）管道完成，该管道已针对手工编码的训练集进行校准并发布以支持重复验证。现有文献指出最优值约为每年0.6个百分点，远低于大多数发达经济体央行采用的2%目标。这一差距不应自动解读为对2%准则的否定：已发布价格指数中的测量误差可能缩小、扩大甚至反转该差距，而结构文献本身无法确定所需修正的方向。对全部结构调节变量的贝叶斯模型平均显示，研究间的差异由实际建模选择而非选择性报告驱动，主要驱动因素包括货币基准的选择（弗里德曼规则vs.自由放任）、交易摩擦技术、假设的冲击结构以及名义刚性合同的类别。非参数卡尺检验未发现2%目标处存在向上聚集的情况。本文贡献了一个用于结构校准文献的可重复LLM辅助提取管道，以及对最优通胀率文献分歧来源的定量分解。
英文摘要
We revisit the optimal long-run inflation rate using 777 estimates from 116 primary studies published between 1989 and 2026, the largest sample on the topic to date. To our knowledge, this is among the first economics meta-analyses in which primary-data extraction is done from start to finish through a documented and auditable large-language-model pipeline, calibrated against a hand-coded training set and released for replication. The literature points to an optimum of about 0.6 percentage points per year, well below the two-percent targets used by most advanced-economy central banks. The gap should not be automatically read as a verdict against the two-percent norm. Measurement error in published price indices could close, widen, or even reverse the gap, and the structural literature itself cannot pin down the sign of the required correction. Bayesian model averaging over the full set of structural moderators shows that cross-study variation is driven by real modelling choices rather than by selective reporting. The main drivers are the choice of monetary benchmark (Friedman rule vs. laissez-faire), the transactions-frictions technology, the assumed shock structure, and the class of nominal-rigidity contract. The non-parametric caliper test finds no upward bunching at the two-percent target. The paper contributes a reproducible LLM-assisted extraction pipeline for structurally calibrated literature and a quantitative decomposition of where the optimal-inflation literature disagrees.
