MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

FX Dynamics, Limited Participation, and the Forward Bias Anomaly

2005· article· en· W2129744103 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Miguel Villanueva

Bibliographic record

VenueFinancial Review · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsEconometricsSpeculationAnomaly (physics)Equity (law)Liberian dollarFinancial economicsImpulse responseForeign exchange marketMonetary economicsForeign exchangeMathematicsMacroeconomicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Standard foreign exchange (FX) models with goods price stickiness and instantaneous asset market adjustments imply FX overshooting (Dornbusch, 1976), which can explain the forward bias anomaly. Lyons (2001) explained the anomaly via limited participation of FX speculators due to Sharpe ratios lower than equity market alternatives, which implies FX undershooting to interest differential shocks. I derive the time-series implications of overshooting and undershooting for the joint forward/spot FX dynamics in a vector error correction model. I use generalized impulse response analysis (Pesaran and Shin, 1998) to test those implications. All FX studied (pound, deutsch mark, French franc, yen, and Canadian dollar) have dynamics consistent with undershooting during the period from 1975 to 1998.

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)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations6
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFinancial ReviewSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207