Resurrecting the size effect: Evidence from a panel nonlinear cointegration model for the G7 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 Firm size is known to be an important factor affecting stock returns. This study proposes a panel threshold cointegration model to investigate the impact of the size effect on stock returns for the panel of G7 countries: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the U.K., and the U.S. over the period 1991:1–2012:12. The empirical analysis is based upon the nonlinear cointegration framework using the asymmetric ARDL cointegration methodology (Shin et al., 2011). This methodological approach permits a much richer degree of flexibility in the dynamic adjustment process toward equilibrium, than in the classical linear model. Our findings indicate the presence of asymmetric adjustment around a unique long‐run equilibrium. In particular, the empirical analysis provides evidence of asymmetric effects between stock returns and the size effect, while controlling for the book‐to‐market ratio and the price‐to‐earnings ratio.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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