MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297820146 · doi:10.55057/ijaref.2022.4.3.10

The Impact of Russia-Ukraine Invasion on Oil and Gas Stocks in 7 Countries by Using Event Study Approach

2022· article· en· W4297820146 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Roos Amelya

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Advanced Research in Economics and Finance · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy Security and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEvent studySample (material)Abnormal returnSignificant differenceEvent (particle physics)Statistical analysisFossil fuelCrude oilBusinessStructural breakEconomicsFinancial economicsEconometricsGeographyFinanceStatisticsEngineeringMathematicsStock exchange

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this research is to analyze the effect of the announcement of Russia-Ukraine invasion on the market reaction as reflected in abnormal returns and trading volume activity in 7 countries, namely Saudi Arabia, USA, Canada, UAE, Nigeria, Kuwait, and Norway. This research uses secondary data and there are 29 firms of oil and gas listed in each state as a total sample for this research. This research employs the event study method. The event window is 5 days before and 5 days after the occurrence, and the estimating period is 100 days. Normality test analysis and statistical hypothesis testing were carried out in this study. The results showed that there is no significant difference in abnormal returns but there was a significant difference in trading volume before and after the announcement of the event. This result is supported by the results of the analysis based on countries that are not members of OPEC, countries with semi-strong form of efficient market, and countries with weak form of efficient market as comparisons.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Advanced Research in Economics and FinanceSame topicGlobal Energy Security and PolicyFrench-language works237,207