Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the pervasive influence of investor sentiment in equity markets is well documented, little is known about behavioral manifestations in bond markets. In this paper, we explore the impact of investor sentiment on corporate bond yield spreads. Our results reveal that bond yield spreads co‐vary with sentiment, and sentiment‐drivenmispricings and systematic reversal trends are very similar to those for stocks. Bonds appear underpriced (with high yields) during pessimistic periods and overpriced (with low yields) when optimism reigns. Consequent reversals result in predictable trends in post‐sentiment yield spreads.When beginning‐of‐period sentiment is low, subsequent yield spreads are low; high sentiment periods are followed by high spreads. High‐yield bonds (low ratings, Industrials and Utilities, extreme maturities or low durations, specially if low rated) demonstrate greater susceptibility to mispricings due to sentiment compared to low‐yield bonds. The incremental yield spread gap between highand low‐yield bonds converges subsequent to periods of low sentiment, and diverges after high sentiment. Equity attributes marginally influence the impact of sentiment on bond spreads, but mostly for distressed bonds only.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".