MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039061403 · doi:10.1257/mac.1.2.127

Understanding the Forward Premium Puzzle: A Microstructure Approach

2009· article· en· W2039061403 on OpenAlexaff
Craig Burnside, Martin Eichenbaum, Sérgio Rebelo

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Economic Journal Macroeconomics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdverse selectionCurrencyOrder (exchange)Exchange rateEconomicsForeign exchangeMarket microstructureForeign exchange marketInterest rateMonetary economicsSelection (genetic algorithm)Financial economicsBusinessMicroeconomicsComputer scienceFinanceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High interest rate currencies tend to appreciate relative to low interest rate currencies. We argue that adverse selection problems between participants in foreign exchange markets can account for this “forward premium puzzle.” The key feature of our model is that the adverse selection problem facing market makers is worse when an agent wants to trade against a public information signal. So, when based on public information, the currency is expected to appreciate, there is more adverse selection associated with a sell order than with a buy order. (JEL E43, F31, G15)

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.501
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations113
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Economic Journal MacroeconomicsSame topicFinancial Markets and Investment StrategiesFrench-language works237,207