Modelling multiple REIT indices using TAR models based on aggregation functions
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
The aim of this paper is to compare descriptive and predictive qualities of multivariate TAR models with threshold variables obtained via aggregation functions versus one-dimensional TAR models with endogenous as well as exogenous threshold variables. Time series of REIT indexes of 5 selected G7 countries (USA, Japan, Great Britain, France, Canada) were modelled. They manifest similar behaviour in the considered time period, January 1, 2000-May 8, 2012, divided into 3 sub-periods determined by the recent global financial markets crisis (July 1, 2008-April 30, 2009). The multivariate TAR models with threshold variables constructed via aggregation functions have in all cases better descriptive properties and in most cases they also show better prediction properties. A new subclass of those models, based on the OMA type of aggregation functions, exhibit promising properties both with respect to their descriptive and predictive performance.
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 | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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