MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3099227813 · doi:10.3982/ecta17038

Dynamic Noisy Rational Expectations Equilibrium With Insider Information

2020· article· en· W3099227813 on OpenAlexaff
Jérôme Detemple, Marcel Rindisbacher, Scott Robertson

Bibliographic record

VenueEconometrica · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsQuest University Canada
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEconomicsRational expectationsInformation asymmetryAsset (computer security)Private information retrievalInsider tradingInsiderMicroeconomicsMathematical economicsEconometricsCapital asset pricing modelBounded functionFinancial economicsComputer scienceFinanceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study equilibria in multi‐asset and multi‐agent continuous‐time economies with asymmetric information and bounded rational noise traders. We establish the existence of two equilibria. First, a full communication equilibrium where the informed agents' signal is disclosed to the market and static policies are optimal. Second, a partial communication equilibrium where the signal disclosed is affine in the informed and noise traders' signals, and dynamic policies are optimal. Here, information asymmetry creates demand for two public funds, as well as a dark pool where private information trades can be implemented. Markets are endogenously complete and equilibrium returns have a three factor structure with stochastic factors and loadings. Results are valid for constant absolute risk averse investors, general vector diffusions for fundamentals, nonlinear terminal payoffs, and non‐Gaussian noise trading. Asset price dynamics and public information flows are endogenous, and rational expectations equilibria are special cases of the general results.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconometricaSame topicStochastic processes and financial applicationsFrench-language works237,207