MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953821456 · doi:10.3390/jrfm12020094

Equity Market Contagion in Return Volatility during Euro Zone and Global Financial Crises: Evidence from FIMACH Model

2019· article· en· W2953821456 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shahiduzzaman Quoreshi, Reaz Uddin, Viroj Jienwatcharamongkhol

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsVolatility (finance)Equity (law)Financial contagionStock marketHeteroscedasticityStock (firearms)Financial crisisProxy (statistics)Monetary economicsFinancial economicsStock market indexEconometricsMacroeconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current paper studies equity markets for the contagion of squared index returns as a proxy for stock market volatility, which has not been studied earlier. The study examines squared stock index returns of equity in 35 markets, including the US, UK, Euro Zone and BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) countries, as a proxy for the measurement of volatility. Results from the conditional heteroskedasticity long memory model show the evidence of long memory in the squared stock returns of all 35 stock indices studied. Empirical findings show the evidence of contagion during the global financial crisis (GFC) and Euro Zone crisis (EZC). The intensity of contagion varies depending on its sources. This implies that the effects of shocks are not symmetric and may have led to some structural changes. The effect of contagion is also studied by decomposing the level series into explained and unexplained behaviors.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.169
Threshold uncertainty score0.885

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207