Modelling Volatility Spillover Effects Between Developed Stock Markets and Asian Emerging Stock Markets
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper examines the linkages of stock markets across the USA, Japan and six Asian developing countries: China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand over the period 1 January 1993 to 31 December 2012. The volatility spillover is modelled through an asymmetric multivariate generalized autoregressive conditional heteroscedastic model. We find significant unidirectional shock and volatility spillovers from the US market to both the Japanese and the Asian emerging markets. It is also found that the volatility spillovers between the US market and the Asian markets are stronger and bidirectional during the Asian financial crisis. Further, during the last 5 years, the linkages between the Japanese market and the Asian emerging markets became more apparent. Our paper contributes to the literature by examining both the long‐run and the short‐run periods and focusing on shock and volatility spillovers rather than return spillovers, which have been the primary focus of most other studies. Copyright © 2014 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it