MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972808224 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v11n10p32

Volatility Spillover Effects among Securities Exchanges in East Africa

2019· article· en· W2972808224 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nelson Yunvirusaba, Jane Aduda, Ananda Kube

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAfrican Union
KeywordsSpillover effectVolatility (finance)EconomicsMonetary economicsFinancial economicsEconometricsBusinessMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims at examining volatility spillover effects among the returns of three out of the four securities exchanges in East Africa. Vector autoregressive model was used to model return series evolution; and, Johansen co-integration test, was further applied to examine any possibilities of co-integration. Dynamic conditional correlation model was then employed to explore the dynamics of conditional variances. Daily closing all share indices data spanning the period 29 February 2008 to 28 February 2018 was used. The results of the study revealed that, there is bidirectional causality between Nairobi securities exchange and Dar es salaam securities exchange; unidirectional effect between Nairobi securities exchange and Uganda securities exchange; while between Dar es salaam securities exchange and Uganda securities exchange, there is a unidirectional effect. The study findings also indicate evidence of no co-integration, thus, no long-run relationship among the exchanges. The dynamic conditional correlation proved to be the most parsimonious model whose results indicated evidence of volatility spillover among the securities exchanges.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207