Tail Dependency and Risk Spillover between Oil Market and Chinese Sectoral Stock Markets—An Assessment of the 2013 Refined Oil Pricing Reform
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Chinese refined oil pricing reform in 2013 has brought its refined oil price to be more aligned with the international oil price, helping to mitigate prior distorted pricing mechanisms. Its impact on the correlation, tail risks, and spillover effects between the international crude oil market and Chinese sectoral stock markets warrants empirical assessments. Time-varying copula models and conditional VaR (CoVaR) are employed to examine the correlation between the international oil market and Chinese sectoral stock indexes before and after the 2013 pricing reform, as well as the tail risk and spillover effects of the extreme and moderate oil markets. The results show that: (1) the correlation between the oil market and all 11 Chinese stock sectors is positive both before and after the reform, but the correlation is weaker after the reform than before; (2) The downside tail risk of the extreme and moderate oil markets to most Chinese stock market sectors, and the upside tail risk of the moderate oil market to most stock sectors are lower after the reform; (3) Tail risk spillover effects of extreme oil market on all sectors exist before and after the reform; (4) The upside tail risk spillover effects of moderate oil market exist in most sectors before the reform, but they almost all disappear after the reform. The downside risk spillover effects of the moderate oil market do not exist before or after the reform. The findings provide valuable references for portfolio management and future policy update.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".