算法艺术创作
algorithmic-art
通过代码和可调参数创作生成艺术与交互式视觉效果。
jimf-writing-style【设计与创意】Use when the prose, intro, abstract, or Highlights of a Journal of International Money and Finance (JIMF) manuscript do not land for an international-finance audience. Sharpens the writing and front matter; it does not change the result or the design.
独立 GitHub 快照 · 自动分类 · 以原作者文档为准
JIMF prose is empirical, direct, and policy-aware. It is not the model-first register of the theory journals nor the corporate-finance register of JFE; it is open-economy macro-finance written for an audience that includes both academics and policy economists. Lead with the international question and the answer; make the mechanism a noun the reader can hold (pass-through, spillover, push factor, the trilemma); and quantify the headline early. Write the abstract and intro last, after the design and robustness settle.
jimf-literature-positioning).Writing style is a late-stage polish. Do not rewrite the intro or abstract while the identification, the cross-country design, or the headline magnitude are still moving — you will rewrite them again, and a polished claim built on an unsettled result is worse than no polish, because it commits you in prose to a number that may change. Invoke this skill once the empirical layer is stable and the contribution is staked, when the remaining gap is that the paper does not read like a JIMF paper. The abstract and intro are genuinely written last, after jimf-robustness and jimf-tables-figures have settled what the paper actually shows.
JIMF's readership spans academic international-finance economists and policy economists at central banks, the IMF, and the BIS. Serve both without splitting the paper: keep the economics (what the result means for an open economy) in the topic sentences where a policy reader will find it, and keep the econometrics (the identification and inference machinery) in the body of each section where a specialist will scrutinize it. The conclusion is the policy reader's section — give a bounded, honestly caveated takeaway ("our estimates imply capital-account management, not the exchange-rate regime, is the binding margin for monetary autonomy in our sample, though the result is identified off open-economy variation and may not extend to closed-account regimes"). A paper that reads as all-econometrics loses the policy reader; one that reads as all-narrative loses the referee.
Field terms carry precise meanings; use them exactly. Pass-through is the elasticity of prices to the exchange rate, distinct from exchange-rate disconnect. Spillover is a cross-border effect of a domestic shock; contagion implies excess co-movement beyond fundamentals; transmission is the channel — do not swap them. Push factors are global/external drivers of flows; pull factors are domestic. Sterilized vs. unsterilized FX intervention are different operations. De jure vs. de facto exchange-rate regime are different classifications. Mixing these is the fastest way to signal that the paper is written from outside the field; getting them right signals the opposite.
A draft's abstract reads: "We study capital flows and monetary policy and find significant relationships across countries." The JIMF rewrite: "Foreign monetary tightening drives portfolio outflows from emerging markets, but only where the capital account is open: a 25bp US surprise lowers EM bond inflows by X% of GDP in open-account economies and has no effect in closed ones, sharpening the global-financial-cycle vs. trilemma debate. The result implies capital-account management, not the exchange-rate regime, is the binding margin for monetary autonomy." Now the international mechanism, the magnitude, and the policy stake are all in one paragraph under 250 words.
【Journal】Journal of International Money and Finance
【Skill】jimf-writing-style
【Intro】question + design + headline number on page 1? [Y/N]
【Mechanism】one consistent named channel? [Y/N]
【Abstract】≤250 words, factual, magnitude + policy point? [Y/N]
【Front matter】Highlights + keywords + JEL present? [Y/N]
【Units】interpretable magnitudes, not raw coefficients? [Y/N]
【Source status】abstract/Highlights limits verified / 待核实
【Next skill】jimf-submission