On the role of local blockchain network features in cryptocurrency price formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cryptocurrencies and the underpinning blockchain technology have gained unprecedented public attention recently. In contrast to fiat currencies, transactions of cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin and Litecoin, are permanently recorded on distributed ledgers to be seen by the public. As a result, public availability of all cryptocurrency transactions allows us to create a complex network of financial interactions that can be used to study not only the blockchain graph, but also the relationship between various blockchain network features and cryptocurrency risk investment. We introduce a novel concept of chainlets, or blockchain motifs, to utilize this information. Chainlets allow us to evaluate the role of local topological structure of the blockchain on the joint Bitcoin and Litecoin price formation and dynamics. We investigate the predictive Granger causality of chainlets and identify certain types of chainlets that exhibit the highest predictive influence on cryptocurrency price and investment risk. More generally, while statistical aspects of blockchain data analytics remain virtually unexplored, the paper aims to highlight various emerging theoretical, methodological and applied research challenges of blockchain data analysis that will be of interest to the broad statistical community.The Canadian Journal of Statistics48: 561–581; 2020 © 2020 Statistical Society of Canada
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".