MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rate‐of‐return Parity in Experimental Asset Markets*

2006· article· en· W2145788827 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

VenueReview of International Economics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDividendEconomicsHolding period returnFinancial economicsRate of returnEconometricsArbitrageTime-weighted returnBook valueInterest rate parityMonetary economicsRate of return on a portfolioInvestment performanceInterest rateFinanceMicroeconomicsReturn on investment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper applies experimental methods to evaluate the completeness of arbitrage and rate‐of‐return parity in simultaneous asset markets in which the assets are denominated in different currencies. Two assets, which return uncertain, but known, dividends in each trading period, are traded over 20 periods, after which the asset has no value. Results indicate that risk‐neutral rate‐of‐return parity is a strong predictor of relative asset prices when assets have common expected dividends and the expected dividends have common variances. The predictive power of risk‐neutral rate‐of‐return parity is reduced as the assets become differentiated.

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 score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.224 · 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