MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108925234 · doi:10.5430/afr.v1n1p169

Testing the Weak Form of Efficient Market Hypothesis in Nigerian Capital Market

2012· article· en· W2108925234 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mayowa Gabriel Ajao, Richard Osayuwu

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting and Finance Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatisticEconomicsEconometricsAutocorrelationEfficient-market hypothesisRandomness testsStock exchangeCapital marketTest statisticNormality testFinancial economicsStatistical hypothesis testingStock marketStatisticsRandomnessMathematicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims at testing the weak form of efficient market hypothesis in the Nigerian capital market. The scope of the study consist of all securities traded on the floor of the Nigerian Stock Exchange and the month end value of the All Share Index from 2001 – 2010 constitute the data analyzed. The serial correlation technique of data analysis was used to test for independence of successive price movement and the distributive pattern while runs test was used to test for randomness of share price movement. The result of the serial correlation shows that the correlation coefficients did not violate the two-standard error test. Furthermore, the Box-Ljung statistic shows that none of the serial correlation coefficients was significant and the Box pierce Q statistics shows that the overall significance of the serial correlation test was poor while the result of the distribution pattern shows that stock price movements are approximately normal. on the basis of this findings ,we conclude that successive price changes of stocks traded on the floor of the Nigerian Capital Market are independent and random therefore, the Nigerian Capital Market is efficient in the weak-form.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.087
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.087
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations36
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccounting and Finance ResearchSame topicFinancial Markets and Investment StrategiesFrench-language works237,207