Capital Market Integration and Industrial Structure: The Case of Australia, Canada and the United States
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
Using a matched sample design where companies are matched by size and industry from Australian, Canadian and US capital markets, we investigate whether capital market integration varies across industries and by geographical proximity. The tests are conducted in the multi-factor pricing framework over the 1983-1997 period. Our evidence supports two main findings. First, the pricing of Australian stocks is different from that of their Canadian and U.S. counterparts. The Australian stocks are priced in a partially segmented global market whereas the Canadian stocks are priced in a regionally integrated North American stock market. Second, global industry stocks such as oil and mining stocks are priced in a relatively integrated capital market while regional industry stocks such as consumer and capital goods stocks are priced in segmented markets. This evidence suggests that industry and geographical distance may proxy factors that may be relevant in international asset pricing.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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