MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2513875013 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v9n10p115

Contagion between Islamic and Conventional Banking: A GJR DCC-GARCH and VAR Analysis

2016· article· en· W2513875013 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohamed Amin Chakroun, Mohamed Imen Gallali

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancial contagionAutoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityShock (circulatory)Islamic bankingIslamSubprime crisisFinancial systemGranger causalityFinancial crisisCausality (physics)Vector autoregressionMonetary economicsOrder (exchange)BusinessEconomicsEconometricsFinanceMacroeconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims testing the presence of contagion through Islamic and conventional banking systems during the subprime crisis. Specifically, we examine how far a shock striking conventional or Islamic banks is exported from one group to another or remain limited. Therefore, we adopt a GJR DCC-GARCH model to study the dynamic conditional correlation and the vector auto-regression VAR model in order to identify causality direction and the impact of a shock on the returns of each banking index. Hence, our results indicate that Islamic banks are not isolated from conventional banks while there is a contagion phenomenon between these two financial systems. Furthermore, we determined that during the crisis, Islamic banks could not absorb this effects and ensure stability because these banks were also affected by the crisis.

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)0.005
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207