MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943957906 · doi:10.1080/00207179.2019.1616225

An automated financial indices-processing scheme for classifying market liquidity regimes

2019· article· en· W2943957906 on OpenAlexafffund
Xing Gu, Rogemar Mamon, Matt Davison, Yu Hao

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Control · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMarket liquidityEconometricsHidden Markov modelMultivariate statisticsFinancial marketIndex (typography)EconomicsLiquidity riskTreasuryComputer scienceFinancial economicsFinanceArtificial intelligenceMachine learningGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A multivariate hidden Markov model (HMM)-based approach is developed to capture simultaneously the regime-switching dynamics of four financial market indicators: Treasury-Euro Dollar rate spread, US dollar index, volatility index and S&P 500 bid-ask spread. These indicators exhibit stochasticity, mean reversion, spikes and state memory, and they are deemed to drive the main characteristics of liquidity risk and regarded to mirror financial markets' liquidity levels. In this paper, an online system is proposed in which observed indicators are processed and the results are then interfaced with an advanced alert mechanism that gives out appropriate measures. In particular, two stochastic models, with HMM-modulated parameters switching between liquidity regimes, are integrated to capture the evolutions of the four time series or their transformations. Parameter estimation is accomplished by deriving adaptive multivariate filters. Indicators' joint empirical characteristics are captured well and useful early warnings are obtained for occurrence prediction of illiquidity episodes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.376 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of ControlSame topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207