Forecasting China's Crude Oil Futures Volatility: The Role of the Jump, Jumps Intensity, and Leverage Effect
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study explores the forecasting ability of jump, jump intensity, and leverage effect for an emerging futures market, China's crude oil futures market, using different kinds of HAR‐type models. From an in‐sample perspective, we find that the HAR components, monthly leverage effect, jump size, and jump intensity have positive effects on future oil volatility. Moreover, out‐of‐sample results show that a forecasting model with jump and jump intensity cannot only achieve a superior forecasting performance under low volatility level but also increase the economic value. Subsequently, we examine the effect of decompositions of jump information, the results show signed jump components can improve the accuracy. Finally, we extend our empirical analysis considering different forecast horizons, COVID‐19 pandemic, and different trading hours. Our empirical results are robust and consistent.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it