MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3182806411 · doi:10.3390/jrfm14070308

A Comparative Analysis on Probability of Volatility Clusters on Cryptocurrencies, and FOREX Currencies

2021· article· en· W3182806411 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Usha Rekha Chinthapalli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCryptocurrencyVolatility (finance)CurrencyComputer scienceDigital currencyAutoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityForeign exchange marketEconometricsFinancial marketEconomicsFinanceMonetary economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the attention of investors, practitioners and academics has grown in cryptocurrency. Initially, the cryptocurrency was designed as a viable digital currency implementation, and subsequently, numerous derivatives were produced in a range of sectors, including nonmonetary activities, financial transactions, and even capital management. The high volatility of exchange rates is one of the main features of cryptocurrencies. The article presents an interesting way to estimate the probability of cryptocurrency volatility clusters. In this regard, the paper explores exponential hybrid methodologies GARCH (or EGARCH) and through its portrayal as a financial asset, ANN models will provide analytical insight into bitcoin. Meanwhile, more scalable modelling is needed to fit financial variable characteristics such as ANN models because of the dynamic, nonlinear association structure between financial variables. For financial forecasting, BP is contained in the most popular methods of neural network training. The backpropagation method is employed to train the two models to determine which one performs the best in terms of predicting. This architecture consists of one hidden layer and one input layer with N neurons. Recent theoretical work on crypto-asset return behavior and risk management is supported by this research. In comparison with other traditional asset classes, these results give appropriate data on the behavior, allowing them to adopt the suitable investment decision. The study conclusions are based on a comparison between the dynamic features of cryptocurrencies and FOREX Currency’s traditional mass financial asset. Thus, the result illustrates how well the probability clusters show the impact on cryptocurrency and currencies. This research covers the sample period between August 2017 and August 2020, as cryptocurrency became popular around that period. The following methodology was implemented and simulated using Eviews and SPSS software. The performance evaluation of the cryptocurrencies is compared with FOREX currencies for better comparative study respectively.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.213 · 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.

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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207