MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076075890 · doi:10.1142/s0218348x13500084

STATISTICAL REVISIT TO THE MIKE-FARMER MODEL: CAN THIS MODEL CAPTURE THE STYLIZED FACTS IN REAL WORLD MARKETS?

2013· article· en· W2076075890 on OpenAlexafffund
Ling‐Yun He, Xing-Chun Wen

Bibliographic record

VenueFractals · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicComplex Systems and Time Series Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersProgram for New Century Excellent Talents in UniversityEast China Institute of TechnologyEast China University of Science and TechnologyChina Agricultural UniversityUniversity of CalgaryNational Science Foundation
KeywordsStylized factVolatility clusteringLeverage effectVolatility (finance)EconometricsScalingEconomicsDetrended fluctuation analysisExponentLeverage (statistics)MathematicsStatisticsAutoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityKeynesian economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to current literature, the Mike-Farmer (MF) model1 is constructed empirically based on the continuous double auction mechanism in an order-driven market, which can successfully capture the diffusive behavior of stock prices at the transaction level. In our paper, we revisit the statistical properties of the generated series of prices based on the MF model to clarify whether it can reproduce the stylized facts in real world markets. However, the Detrended Fluctuation Analysis (DFA) scaling exponent of volatility Hv ≈ 0.6, which may be slightly lower than that in real markets; while a modified version of the MF model proposed by Gu and Zhou2 can improve the DFA scaling exponent of volatility Hv ≈ 0.75, which is closer to the empirical findings. Finally, we test the existence of another commonly found two stylized facts in the real world: the volatility clustering, and leverage effect.

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)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFractalsSame topicComplex Systems and Time Series AnalysisFrench-language works237,207