MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197872227 · doi:10.1108/jm2-04-2020-0101

Modelling exchange-driven fish price dynamics

2021· article· en· W3197872227 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Modelling in Management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsBank of CanadaWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMaximum likelihoodMarkov chainStatisticsEconometricsData miningMathematical optimizationAlgorithmMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This paper aims to put forward and compare two accessible approaches to model and forecast spot prices in the fishing industry. The first modelling approach is a Markov-switching model (MSM) in which a Markov chain captures different economic regimes and a stochastic convenience yield is embedded in the spot price. The second approach is based on a multi-factor model (MFM) featuring three correlated stochastic factors. Design/methodology/approach The two proposed approaches are analysed in terms of parameter-estimation accuracy, information criteria and prediction performance. For MSM’s calibration, the quasi-log-likelihood method was applied directly while for the MFM’s parameter estimation, this paper designs an enhanced multi-variate maximum likelihood method with the aid of moments matching. The numerical experiments make use of both simulated and actual data compiled by the Fish Pool ASA. Data on both the Fish Pool’s forwards and Norwegian T-bill yields were additionally used in the MFM’s implementation. Findings Using simulated data sets, the MSM estimation gives more accurate results than the MFM estimation in terms of the norm in ℓ 2 between the “true” and “computed” parameter estimates and significantly lower standard errors. With actual data sets used to evaluate the forecast values, both approaches have similar performances based on the error analysis. Under some metrics balancing goodness of fit and model complexity, the MFM outperforms the MSM. Originality/value With the aid of simulated and observed data sets examined in this paper, insights are gained concerning the appropriateness, as well as the benefits and weaknesses of the two proposed approaches. The modelling and estimation methodologies serve as prelude to reliable frameworks that will support the pricing and risk management of derivative contracts on fish price evolution, which creates price risk transfer mechanisms from the fisheries/aquaculture sector to the financial industry.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.679
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.214 · 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