An Empirical Examination of Asymmetry on Exchange Rate Spread Using the Quantile Autoregressive Distributed Lag (QARDL) Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In economics, some transactions are conducted by the bid rate, and some are conducted by the ask rate. The spread between these two rates creates an essential cost and inefficiency for the economy. Taking these problems into account, the purpose of this study was to analyze the effects of macroeconomic and financial variables on the USD/TL exchange rate bid–ask spread for Türkiye using daily data spanning the period between 2 January 1990 and 2 August 2022. The quantile autoregressive distributed lag (QARDL) model was drawn upon to capture possible asymmetry in parameters and distinguish the results between different locations. The results obtained in this study may differ from the linear model and may change by the location, implying that the spread is reduced by the volume while it is increased by volatility and interest rates in the long run for some quantiles. Stock prices stir it in the long run, yet they decline it in the short run, indicating an asymmetry. Following the examples from the literature that analyzed the relationship via linear models, this paper employed a QARDL model for exploring location and sign asymmetry in the results for some quantiles. As the results indicate, efficiency in the bid–ask exchange rate spread can be controlled; therefore, it is our suggestion for policymakers to consider the extreme levels and asymmetry of the bid–ask exchange rate spread while evaluating its penetrating macro-financial variates.
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 | 0.006 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".