MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3124579424

Government Bond Market Seasonality, Diversification and Cointegration: International Evidence

2001· article· en· W3124579424 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kenneth L. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCointegrationDiversification (marketing strategy)Government bondEconomicsBond marketFinancial economicsSeasonalityBondLiberian dollarEconometricsMonetary economicsBusinessFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using international bond market data for the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Germany, France, and Japan, several hypotheses are investigated. Market efficiency is addressed by testing for seasonality and cointegration. The seasonality results are mixed. When employing regression, a January effect is detected in several markets (United States, Germany, France, United Kingdom, and Canada) using local currencies. However, when using a nonparametric test, the January effect is supported only for France. Using U.S. dollar returns, regression results also detect a January effect for several markets (United States, Germany, France, and the United Kingdom). These results are not confirmed by a nonparametric test. Correlation analysis shows considerable diversification opportunities for short-term investors, with correlations rising over long horizons. Cointegration tests indicate that several of the markets share cointegrating vectors, increasing the possibilities of using other endogenous bond markets to better predict movements in a particular market.

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)0.011
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies→French-language works237,207→