MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3194755827 · doi:10.3390/jrfm14080386

Optimizing Stock Market Returns during Global Pandemic Using Regression in the Context of Indian Stock Market

2021· article· en· W3194755827 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Pradip Debnath, H. M. Srivastava

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock marketStock exchangeFinancial economicsPortfolioVolatility (finance)EconomicsStock (firearms)Stock market bubblePandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)EconometricsContext (archaeology)FinanceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stock markets around the world experienced a massive collapse during the first wave of COVID-19. Roughly in the month of January 2021, the second wave of COVID-19 struck in India, reaching its peak in May, and by the end of May, the active cases started to decline. A third wave is again predicted by the end of 2021, and as such, the COVID-19 pandemic seems to have become a periodic phenomenon over the last couple of years. Therefore, the study of the behavior of the stock market as well as that of the investors becomes very interesting and crucial in this highly volatile and vulnerable market trend. Motivated by these facts, in the present paper, the researcher develops a model for portfolio management, using curve-fitting techniques and shows that this model can encounter the market volatility efficiently in the context of the Indian stock market. The portfolio is designed based on data taken from the National Stock Exchange (NSE), India, during 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2020. The performance of the portfolio in real-life situation during 1 January 2021 to 21 May 2021 is examined, assuming investments are made according to the proposed model.

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)0.002
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.578

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207