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
From a sample of 910 U.S. firms over the period 1977 1996, we find that structure of the empirical model has significant impacts on resulting estimates of exchange rate exposures from equity returns. While lengthening the return horizon has minimal impact on exposure estimates, the inclusion of a market portfolio in the specification results in significant changes to the exposure estimates. We further demonstrate that different definitions of the market portfolio result in important differences in the overall distribution of exposure estimates and the interpretations of the sign, size, and significance of many firms' exposures. The source of the exposure differences across market portfolios is due to a strong size-exposure relation for U.S. firms. Surprisingly, this size-exposure relation does not appear to be driven by an underlying correlation between size and foreign cash flow position of the firms. An alternative model specification using matched CRSP capital-based size portfolios as controls for market movements in the exposure model produces firm-level exposures with a stronger relation to foreign cash flows and less of a correlation with firm size.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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