MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3178687652

January effect: the existence in Malaysia stock market / Muhamad Faiz Irwan Fadzil

2013· other· en· W3178687652 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUiTM Institutional Repositories (Universiti Teknologi MARA) · 2013
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJanuary effectStatisticStock marketEconomicsCapital marketSeasonalityStandard deviationDemographyGeographyStatisticsMathematicsFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Past studies in the United States, Canada and Australia indicated the existence of seasonality effect, i.e. “January effect” due to taxes imposed on the capital gains in these countries. This paper attempted to find out whether or not this conclusion is also true in the case of Malaysia where there is no tax imposed on the capital gains. Initial observations showed that there is January effect in the year 2007. The mean daily return of January in year 2007 recorded the highest mean score compared to other months studied. Higher mean daily standard deviation in the month of January than other months somewhat reinforce the existence of January effects in the Malaysian market in the year 2007. However, the F-statistic indicated that the overall differences among these months were not statistically significant, which means there is no January effect or even seasonality effect in Malaysia

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUiTM Institutional Repositories (Universiti Teknologi MARA)Same topicFinancial Markets and Investment StrategiesFrench-language works237,207