MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1807529681 · doi:10.1080/00036846.2015.1049338

Modelling conditional moments and correlation with the continuous hidden-threshold-skew-normal distribution

2015· article· en· W1807529681 on OpenAlexaff
Rachid Belhachemi, Pierre Rostan, François‐Éric Racicot

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Economics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolatility clusteringEconometricsKurtosisAutoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityConditional probability distributionStylized factConditional varianceHeteroscedasticityVolatility (finance)EconomicsFinancial models with long-tailed distributions and volatility clusteringSkewnessConditional expectationAutoregressive modelMathematicsStatisticsStochastic volatilityForward volatility

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A key issue in modelling conditional densities of returns of financial assets is the time-variation of conditional volatility. The classic econometric approach models volatility of returns with the generalized autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity (GARCH) models where the conditional mean and the conditional volatility depend only on historical prices. We propose a new family of distributions in which the conditional distribution depends on a latent continuous factor with a continuum of states. The distribution has an interpretation in terms of a mixture distribution with time-varying mixing probabilities. The distribution parameters have economic interpretations in terms of conditional volatilities and correlations of the returns with the hidden continuous state. We show empirically that this distribution outperforms its main competitor, the mixed normal conditional distribution, in terms of capturing the stylized facts known for stock returns, namely, volatility clustering, leverage effect, skewness, kurtosis and regime dependence.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.538
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied EconomicsSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207