Industries' heterogeneous reactions during the COVID‐19 outbreak: Evidence from Chinese stock markets
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study examines the heterogeneous effects of the COVID‐19 outbreak on stock prices in China. We confirm what is already known, that the pandemic has had a significant negative impact on stock market returns. Additionally, we find, this effect is heterogeneous across industries. Second, fear sentiment can directly cause stock prices to fall and panic exacerbates the negative impact of the pandemic on stock returns. Third, and most importantly, we demonstrate the underlying mechanisms of four firm characteristics and find that those with high asset intensity, low labor intensity, high inventory‐to‐revenue ratio, and small market value are more negatively affected than others. For labor‐intensive state‐owned firms, in particular, stock performance worsened because of higher idle labor costs. Finally, we created an index to measure the relative position of an industry in the supply chain, which shows that downstream companies were more vulnerable to the effects of the pandemic.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it