Stock price dynamics before crashes : a complex network study on the U.S. stock market
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Historically, stock market crashes have caused trillions of dollars in losses and have dramatically destroyed investors’ confidence in the stock market. Independent empirical studies have converged to prove the synchronization phenomenon as the trigger of stock market crashes (Tse, Liu, & Lau, 2010). As well, the Phase Transition Model explains the building-up mechanism and the critical point existing in stock market crash (Yalamova & McKelvey, 2011). In this study, we propose to add more empirical evidence to the current studies and provide an indicator to possibly predict the stock market crashes. We apply the Potential-based Hierarchical Agglomerative (PHA) Method, the Backbone Extraction Method, and the Dot Matrix Plot to extract and display the changing clusters’ structure dynamics from the market equilibrium state to a bubble building-up state by applying the Standard & Poor 500 (S&P 500) index constituents’ daily price correlation matrix.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".