MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Revisiting Quantile Granger Causality Between the Stock Price Indices and Exchange Rates for G7 Countries

2017· article· en· W2781496725 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tienwei Lou, Wuchang Luo

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Economic and Financial Review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantileEconometricsGranger causalityEconomicsIndex (typography)Quantile regressionStock exchangeStock (firearms)PortfolioExchange rateStock market indexFinancial economicsMonetary economicsStock marketFinanceGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The daily data of the stock price index and the foreign exchange rate in G7 were utilized for the period between January 4, 1999 and June 30 2015. From the empirical study of Granger causality test in quantiles, there are three main findings. Firstly, there is no long-run significant relationship between the stock price index and exchange rate in G7. Secondly, different types of short-run relationships exist between the two variables among G7 countries. In Canada, Italy, and U.S.A., the relationship is bidirectional, and the asymmetric effect is at different quantiles. In France and Japan, the relationship is unidirectional, from the stock price index to the exchange rate, and the relationship is at different quantiles for the two countries. In Germany and U.K., the relationship is unidirectional in the opposite direction and is also at different quantiles. Lastly, it shows that international trading effects at different quantiles exist in Canada (at high quantile), Italy (at median quantile), and U.K. (at low quantile). On the other hand, portfolio balance effects at different quantiles exist in Germany (at low and median quantiles) and U.S.A. (at high quantile). The study shows neither effect in France and Japan. The empirical findings in this paper have important implications for academicians, international institutional investors, and policy-makers on the G7 markets.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.427
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Economic and Financial ReviewSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207