MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312070645 · doi:10.3390/jrfm16010002

Asymmetric Information Flow between Exchange Rate, Oil, and Gold: New Evidence from Transfer Entropy Approach

2022· article· en· W4312070645 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Moinak Maiti, Parthajit Kayal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransfer entropyInformation flowEntropy (arrow of time)Information transferEconometricsFlow (mathematics)Environmental scienceMathematicsStatisticsThermodynamicsMechanicsPhysicsPrinciple of maximum entropy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study used transfer entropy and effective transfer entropy to examine the asymmetric information flow between exchange rates, oil, and gold. The dataset is composed of daily data covering the period of 1 January 2018 to 31 December 2021. Further, the dataset is bifurcated for analysis for before and during COVID. The bidirectional information flow is observed between EUR/USD and Oil for the whole study period unlike before COVID. However, during COVID, there was a unidirectional information flow from Oil→EUR/USD. The study finds a significant unidirectional information flow from Gold→EUR/USD. The study estimates also indicate that before COVID, the direction of information flow was from Oil→Gold. However, the direction of information flow reversed during COVID from Gold→Oil. Overall, the direction of information flow among these three variables is asymmetric. The highest transfer entropy was observed for Gold→EUR/USD among all the pairs under consideration.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207