MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074044129 · doi:10.1016/j.rfe.2007.09.003

The day‐of‐the‐week effect and conditional volatility: Sensitivity of error distributional assumptions

2007· article· en· W2074044129 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Financial Economics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconometricsAutoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityVolatility (finance)StatisticsEconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We test for reliable evidence of the day‐of‐the‐week effect on both the mean and volatility for the S&P/TSX Canadian return index. Unlike previous studies, we permit several specifications for the error distribution — GARCH normal, Student's t , generalized error distribution, and double exponential distribution. Unlike other studies, we find that the day‐of‐the‐week effect in both mean and conditional volatility is sensitive to the particular specification of the underlying distributions. We also find that using a regression analysis assuming a Student's t distribution is a better way to investigate this effect. Our evidence demonstrates the apparent fragility of previous empirical studies on calendar anomalies. Thus, our results serve as a warning that with financial data, the error distributional assumptions are critical to correctly identifying empirical regularities in the data.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.748
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.233 · 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