MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118014558 · doi:10.1088/1469-7688/3/2/305

Systematic risk and timescales

2003· article· en· W2118014558 on OpenAlexafffund
Ramazan Gen ̧ay, Faruk Sel ̧uk, Brandon Whitcher

Bibliographic record

VenueQuantitative Finance · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaColorado CollegeSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCapital asset pricing modelPortfolioEconometricsWaveletMarket portfolioSystematic riskBETA (programming language)EconomicsScale (ratio)Financial economicsRate of return on a portfolioSecurity market linePortfolio optimizationMathematicsComputer scienceStock marketPhysicsGeologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper we propose a new approach to estimating the systematic risk (the beta of an asset) in a capital asset pricing model (CAPM). The proposed method is based on a wavelet multiscaling approach that decomposes a given time series on a scale-by-scale basis. At each scale, the wavelet variance of the market return and the wavelet covariance between the market return and a portfolio are calculated to obtain an estimate of the portfolio's beta. The empirical results show that the relationship between the return of a portfolio and its beta becomes stronger as the wavelet scale increases. Therefore, the predictions of the CAPM model are more relevant in the medium long run as compared to short time horizons.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.232
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations196
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuantitative FinanceSame topicFinancial Markets and Investment StrategiesFrench-language works237,207