English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We reconsider the issue of the (non-)equivalence of period and continuous time analysis in macroeconomic theory and its implications for the existence of chaotic dynamics in empirical macroeconomics. We start from the methodological precept that period and continuous time representations of the same macrostructure should give rise to the same qualitative outcome, i.e. in particular, that the results of period analysis should not depend on the length of the period chosen. A simple example where this is fulfilled is given by the Solow growth model, while all chaotic dynamics in period models of dimension less than 3 are in conflict with this precept. We discuss a typical example from the recent literature, where chaos results from an asymptotically stable continuous-time macroeconomic model when it is reformulated as a discrete-time model with a sufficiently long period length.

The J2 Status of "Chaos" in Period Macroeconomic Models