MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997061047 · doi:10.1016/j.rfe.2013.12.001

Foreign exchange rate exposure: Evidence from Canada

2013· article· en· W1997061047 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohammad Al‐Shboul, Sajid Anwar

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Financial Economics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicRisk Management in Financial Firms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancial crisisSample (material)Sign (mathematics)Stock (firearms)EconomicsMonetary economicsEconometricsExchange rateLinear relationshipFinancial economicsStatisticsChemistryMathematicsMacroeconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using weekly data from 2003 to 2011, this paper examines the presence of exchange rate exposure in thirteen Canadian industry sectors. This study contributes to the literature in a number of ways: (i) it considers the presence of exposure not only in the full sample but also in the pre and post‐Global Financial Crisis (GFC) periods, (ii) it considers both linear and nonlinear exposure and (iii) it makes use of the sign and size bias tests to investigate the presence of asymmetric exposure. In general, we find some evidence of linear and nonlinear exposure in the full sample as well as in the pre and post‐GFC sub‐samples. We also find weak evidence of an asymmetric exposure sign effect on stock returns in the full and pre‐GFC sample periods. Stock returns are found to respond asymmetrically to the positive magnitude of exposure in both the‐pre and post‐GFC sample periods. In overall terms, the GFC appears to have weakly contributed to the overall strength of the exposure.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Financial EconomicsSame topicRisk Management in Financial FirmsFrench-language works237,207