MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1542665681 · doi:10.1002/for.1267

Global Capital Flows, Time‐Varying Fundamentals and Transitional Exchange Rate Dynamics

2011· article· en· W1542665681 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Süleyman Hilmi Kal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Forecasting · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicComplex Systems and Time Series Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsExchange rateSharpe ratioPound (networking)Monetary economicsLiberian dollarEconometricsCapital flowsMarkov chainEquity (law)Financial economicsPortfolioMathematicsMicroeconomicsStatisticsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT In this paper, I investigate the effects of cross‐border capital flows induced by the rate of risk‐adjusted excess returns (Sharpe ratio) on the transitional dynamics of the nominal exchange rate's deviation from its fundamental value. For this purpose, a two‐state time‐varying transition probability Markov regime‐switching process is added to the sticky price exchange rate model with shares. I estimated this model using quarterly data on the four most active floating rate currencies for the years 1973–2009: the Australian dollar, Canadian dollar, Japanese yen and the British pound. The results provide evidence that the Sharpe ratios of debt and equity investments influence the evolution of transitional dynamics of the currencies' deviation from their fundamental values. In addition, I found that the relationship between economic fundamentals and the nominal exchange rates vary depending on the overvaluation or undervaluation of the currencies. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.148 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ForecastingSame topicComplex Systems and Time Series AnalysisFrench-language works237,207