MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124587253 · doi:10.3386/w11220

An Information Approach to International Currencies

2005· preprint· en· W3124587253 on OpenAlexaff
Richard K. Lyons, Michael J. Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Bureau of Economic Research · 2005
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic theories and models
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersUC Berkeley College of Chemistry
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses currency competition from an information perspective. Transactions in traditional models do not convey information, so transaction costs -the driver of competition outcomes -are driven by market size. In our model transactions do convey information (consistent with recent empirical findings). Several important departures arise. First, adding the information dimension resolves the traditional indeterminacy of currency trade patterns (by mitigating the concentrating force of market-size economies). Second, whether transactions are executed directly or through a vehicle actually affects prices (because these trading methods do not in general reveal the same information). Third, our model provides a new rationale for why some currency pairs never trade directly (information is not sufficiently symmetric to support trading). Fourth, our model formalizes the arbitrage process and shows that arbitrage transaction quantities and price levels are jointly determined. Empirically, the paper provides a first integrated analysis of transactions in a triangle of markets: /$, $/ , and / . Data for the full triangle permits comparison of direct, indirect and arbitrage transactions, for each pair. The information model predicts that transactions should affect prices across markets (e.g., flow in the /$ market should convey information relevant to $/ and / prices), which is borne out.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.361
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.103 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations8
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Bureau of Economic ResearchSame topicEconomic theories and modelsFrench-language works237,207