MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114467007 · doi:10.1080/00036840600970237

The inflation-hedging properties of Turkish REITs

2008· article· en· W2114467007 on OpenAlex
Işıl Erol, Doğan Tırtıroğlu

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

VenueApplied Economics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReal estate investment trustEconomicsTurkishHedgeInflation (cosmology)Real estateMonetary economicsFinancial economicsStock (firearms)Stock marketEconometricsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study empirically tests the inflation-hedging abilities of Turkish REITs in comparison to the indices of common stocks listed on the Istanbul Stock Exchange (ISE) over the period December 1999 to December 2004. Two main factors motivate this study. First, compared to their counterparts in developed capital markets, Turkish REITs have some important tax incentives as well as flexibility in managing their portfolios. Second, the Turkish economy provides a rare and good opportunity to test the hedging behaviour of real estate stocks in periods of both high- and moderate-inflation rates. The empirical results show that Turkish REITs, in general, provide a better hedge against both actual and expected inflation than do the ISE common stock indices. Dividing the entire sample period into the high- and moderate-inflation sub-periods, we find that the hedging ability of REITs is better under high inflation than under moderate inflation.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.680
Threshold uncertainty score0.671

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.135 · 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