MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2974157806 · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3249477

Bitcoin exchange rates: How integrated are markets?

2018· article· en· W2974157806 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMADOC (University of Mannheim) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCryptocurrencyBusinessHigh-frequency tradingEconomicsMonetary economicsEconometricsFinancial economicsComputer scienceComputer securityMarket liquidity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study trading of Bitcoin against US dollar (BTCUSD) on exchanges in three continents, Bitfinex, Bitstamp and Coinbase Pro. We use a high frequency dataset that contains transactions and order book information. The BTCUSD market is highly liquid in terms of bid-ask spreads and order book depth. While spreads are even lower than in equity markets, prices are not integrated across exchanges. Persistent differences exist between the three exchanges in terms of trade prices and posted prices often violating no-arbitrage assumptions. The liquidity of the Bitcoin exchanges is predominantly determined by local factors and is essentially independent of liquidity in equity and FX markets. This suggests that despite the virtual nature of Bitcoin, local jurisdictional factors affect the flow of capital between low and high price jurisdictions.

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 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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.198
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