Trading Activity and Foreign Exchange Market Quality
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper studies intraday market quality for currency pairs with very different trading characteristics, the Euro-U.S. dollar and the Canadian dollar-U.S. dollar. Two sets of tests—the first based on the ratio of long term to short term variances, and the second based on information spillovers—provide consistent conclusions regarding market quality. The variance ratio analysis shows that market quality is highest for the Euro during European trading and lowest during Asian trading. For the Canadian dollar, market quality is highest during North American trading and lowest during Asian trading. Analysis of information spillovers shows that innovations in returns and volatility for the more heavily-traded Euro predict returns and volatility for the Canadian dollar during Asian and European trading, but innovations for the dollar have predictive power for the Euro during North American trading. Our results suggest that foreign exchange market quality is high, not always when quoting and trading activity are heavy but rather, and somewhat unexpectedly, when activity is not only high, but also geographically focused and concentrated
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it