MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195426666 · doi:10.3390/jrfm14080384

How Fast Does the Clock of Finance Run?—A Time-Definition Enforcing Stationarity and Quantifying Overnight Duration

2021· article· en· W3195426666 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michele Caraglio, Fulvio Baldovin, Attilio L. Stella

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicComplex Systems and Time Series Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDuration (music)Series (stratigraphy)EconometricsCyclostationary processScale (ratio)Computer scienceTime seriesStochastic processScalingProtocol (science)Sampling (signal processing)FinanceStatisticsMathematicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A definition of time based on the assumption of scale invariance may enhance and simplify the analysis of historical series with cyclically recurrent patterns and seasonalities. By enforcing simple-scaling and stationarity of the distributions of returns, we identify a successful protocol of time definition in finance, functional from tens of minutes to a few days. Within this time definition, the significant reduction of cyclostationary effects allows analyzing the structure of the stochastic process underlying the series on the basis of statistical sampling sliding along the whole time series. At the same time, the duration of periods in which markets remain inactive is properly quantified by the novel clock, and the corresponding returns (e.g., overnight or weekend) can be consistently taken into account for financial applications. The method is applied to the S&P500 index recorded at a 1 min frequency between September 1985 and June 2013.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicComplex Systems and Time Series AnalysisFrench-language works237,207