MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078003116 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v7n5p22

Temporary Alienation or Lasting Separation? Covered and Government Bond Spread Movements during and after the Crisis of 2007-2009

2015· article· en· W2078003116 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Martin Hellmich, Holger Kraft, Sikandar Siddiqui

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCredit Risk and Financial Regulations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBondGovernment bondSwap (finance)Government (linguistics)EconomicsAsset (computer security)DebtBond marketFiscal sustainabilityFinancial crisisFinancial systemFinanceMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the interrelationship of asset swap spreads on government and mortgage covered bonds in Germany, France, Italy, and Spain between 2007 and mid-2014. Using a local least squares estimator with time varying parameters, we find that in all of the four countries under investigation, the pattern of spread movements for these two bond classes underwent significant changes over time. In Germany, where the confidence of market participants in the solidity of public finances appears to be largely unshaken, spreads were driven apart due to “flight to safety” effects in times of turmoil, and drew closer again when the situation steadied. Yet in France, Italy, and Spain, the (partial) erosion of confidence in the sustainability of government debts led to a protracted weakening of the linkage between the spread movements of government and mortgage covered bonds.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicCredit Risk and Financial RegulationsFrench-language works237,207