MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789446326 · doi:10.1142/9789814405461_0020

The Predictive Ability of the Bond-Stock Earnings Yield Differential Model

2012· book-chapter· en· W2789446326 on OpenAlexaff
Klaus Berge, Giorgio Consigli, William T. Ziemba

Bibliographic record

VenueWORLD SCIENTIFIC eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsPacific Institute for the Mathematical Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBondEarnings yieldEconomicsEquity (law)Stock (firearms)Financial economicsEarningsYield curveEconometricsStock marketYield (engineering)Earnings per shareFinancePrice–earnings ratio

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractThe Federal Reserve (Fed) model provides a framework for discussing stock market over- and undervaluation. It was introduced by market practitioners after Alan Greenspan’s speech on the market’s irrational exuberance in November 1996 as an attempt to understand and predict variations in the equity risk premium (ERP). The model relates the yield on stocks (measured by the ratio of earnings to stock prices) to the yield on nominal Treasury bonds. The theory behind the Fed model is that an optimal asset allocation between stocks and bonds is related to their relative yields and when the bond yield is too high, a market adjustment is needed resulting in a shift out of stocks into bonds. If the adjustment is large, it causes an equity market correction (a decline of 10% within one year); hence. there is a short-term negative ERP. The model predicted the 1987 US., 1990 Japan, 2000 US., and 2002 US. corrections…

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)0.012
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.202
Teacher spread0.158 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWORLD SCIENTIFIC eBooksSame topicFinancial Markets and Investment StrategiesFrench-language works237,207