MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092130541 · doi:10.1142/s0218348x12500120

STUDY ON THE FRACTAL AND CHAOTIC FEATURES OF THE SHANGHAI COMPOSITE INDEX

2012· article· en· W2092130541 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueFractals · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicComplex Systems and Time Series Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersHunan UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsStock marketChaoticHurst exponentFractal dimensionAttractorNonlinear systemFractalComposite indexStock market indexPhase spaceEconometricsCorrelation dimensionStock (firearms)MathematicsEconomicsMathematical analysisStatisticsPhysicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Hurst exponent derived by the R/S analysis method of Shanghai stock market's logarithmic return series is about 0.6298. This shows that the Shanghai stock market exhibits fractal features, and a long memory cycle of about one-and-a-half years. With the reconstruction of phase space, the Shanghai Stock attractor dimension converges to 1.335, which means that the Shanghai stock market has chaotic features, and constructing a dynamic system of the Shanghai stock market needs at least two variables. The findings from the principal component analysis support the conclusion of the existence of chaotic features of the Shanghai stock market. The fractal and chaotic features of the Shanghai stock market reveal the nonlinear properties of the Chinese stock market, and the nonlinearity perspective will be more conducive to the formulation of countermeasures for the development of the Chinese stock market.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.198 · 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