Pre-registration
The 2008-2013 Irish banking crisis was a property-credit-bust event in which the Anglo Irish Bank, Allied Irish Banks, and Bank of Ireland balance-sheet expansion during 2003-2007 produced a real-house-price peak-to-trough decline of >= 50%, a bank-rescue fiscal cost of >= 25% of GDP, an unemployment rate rise of >= 9 pp, and a Troika programme entry. The hypothesis is that the canonical multi-metric signature for Ireland is met across at least 4 of 5 metrics.
Falsification criterion — what would disprove this
This hypothesis is considered falsified if:
Evaluate every canonical_metrics row against its pre-registered source, window, and threshold. The hypothesis is SUPPORTED if at least 4 of 5 metrics are MET. It is REFUTED if even counting all pending metrics as favorable cannot reach 4 MET metrics and the confirmed failures cross the pre-registered refutation guardrail. Otherwise the verdict is INCONCLUSIVE until pending data or pending evaluation metrics are resolved.
formal test & threshold
test: multi_metric_checklist_canonical_banking_crisis threshold: MET >= 4 of 5; REFUTE when MET + PENDING_DATA + PENDING_EVAL < 4; refutation guardrail=1
Method
- Template
multi_metric_checklist- Clustering
none- Sample
- 1 countries · 2002 – 2016
- Evidence type
- canonical_case_multi_metric
Canonical-case checklist evaluator reads canonical_metrics and multi_metric_falsification; no regression model is estimated. Each metric is scored against its pre-registered source, window, and threshold before applying the count rule below.
Data
| Variable | Source | Transform |
|---|---|---|
real_house_price_index outcome | bis:WS_SPPtier 2 | peak_to_trough |
real_gdp outcome | world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.MKTP.KDtier 2 | peak_to_trough |
● ready · ● pending · ● reconstruct-needed
Detailed result card
Result card — banking_crisis_ireland_2008_property_bust
Verdict: supported
Reason: 4 of 5 metrics met threshold (support threshold 4)
Pre-registered rule: SUPPORT if >= 4 of 5 metrics met; REFUTE if <= 1 met (impossible to hit support).
Counts: 4 MET · 0 NOT_MET · 1 PENDING_DATA · 0 PENDING_EVAL
Primary country: IRL
Metric-by-metric
| # | Metric | Status | Observed | Threshold | Notes |
|---|---|:---:|---:|---|---|
| 1 | real_house_price_decline | MET | 64.2 (2012) [peak_to_trough_pct_decline] | >= 50% decline | |
| 2 | real_gdp_contraction | MET | 9.35 (2009) [peak_to_trough_pct_decline] | >= 7% decline | |
| 3 | unemployment_rate_rise | MET | 695 (2011) [pct_increase_from_baseline] | >= 9 pp rise | |
| 4 | government_debt_run_up | MET | 1.4e+05 (2013) [pct_increase_from_baseline] | >= 70 pp of GDP rise | |
| 5 | troika_programme_entered | PENDING_DATA | | yes/no — yes counts as breach | No usable vintage for: imf:EFF_IRL_2010 |
Claim
The 2008-2013 Irish banking crisis was a property-credit-bust event in which the Anglo Irish Bank, Allied Irish Banks, and Bank of Ireland balance-sheet expansion during 2003-2007 produced a real-house-price peak-to-trough decline of >= 50%, a bank-rescue fiscal cost of >= 25% of GDP, an unemployment rate rise of >= 9 pp, and a Troika programme entry. The hypothesis is that the canonical multi-metric signature for Ireland is met across at least 4 of 5 metrics.
Interpretation
The canonical-case pattern match is satisfied: 4 of 5 pre-registered metrics meet their thresholds, above the support threshold of 4. Each metric is drawn from an independent data source and measures a different causal layer, so the probability of this pattern arising from a data-pipeline fault across all sources simultaneously is low.
Steelman live concerns
See hypotheses/steelman/banking_crisis_ireland_2008_property_bust.md for the strongest opposing arguments. Canonical-case multi-metric evidence is a pattern match, not a causal identification — the result card should be read as 'outcome trajectory matches the predicted pattern to degree X' rather than 'policy P caused the outcome'.
Provenance
Vintages pinned in manifest.yaml. Full per-metric diagnostics in diagnostics.json. Machine-readable results in metric_results.parquet.
Strongest opposing argument
Every hypothesis ships with its charitable opposing argument. The framework earns credibility by handling objections at their strongest, not weakest.