Sampling Interval and estimated Betas: Implications for the Presence of Transitory Components in Stock Prices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We provide a theoretical framework to explain the empirical finding that the estimated betas are sensitive to the sampling interval even when using continuously compounded returns. We suppose that stock prices have both permanent and transitory components. The discrete time representation of the beta depends on the sampling interval and two components labeled “permanent and transitory betas”. We show that if no transitory component is present in stock prices then no sampling interval effect occurs. However, the presence of a transitory component implies that the beta is an increasing (decreasing) function of the sampling interval for more (less) risky assets. In our framework, assets are labeled risky if their “permanent beta” is greater than their “transitory beta” and vice versa for less risky assets. Simulations show that our theoretical results provide good approximations for the estimated betas in small samples. We provide empirical evidence about the presence of negative serial correlation and mean reversion in the returns of the portfolios considered. We discuss why our model is better able to provide an explanation for this sampling interval effect than other models in the literature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.208 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".