MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016797386 · doi:10.1111/cjag.12229

Information‐rich wheat markets in the early days of COVID‐19

2020· article· en· W3016797386 on OpenAlexaffvenue
James Vercammen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomie · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFutures contractEconomicsVolatility (finance)Hoarding (animal behavior)RecessionCommodityFinancial economicsCommodity marketCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Monetary economicsMacroeconomicsMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper uses the information implicit in commodity futures and options prices to infer market beliefs about the impact of early‐stages COVID‐19 on commodity market fundamentals. The particular commodity examined is soft red winter (SRW) wheat, and the timeframe is early February to late March 2020. The analysis highlights various adjustments in the cash and futures price of SRW wheat in light of surging short‐run demand from consumer hoarding of staple food products, and a weakening long‐run market from growing wheat stocks and an emerging global recession. This split is causing the forward curve to flatten and basis levels to invert. The change over time in the price of options on wheat futures reveals increased price volatility in response to growing uncertainty about the COVID‐19 impacts. Similarly, changes in the skewness of the option's volatility smile illustrate a shift in traders’ perception about risk in the right versus left tail of the price distribution.

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)0.009
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 score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.139 · 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

Citations35
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d agroeconomieSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207