MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320500374 · doi:10.2991/978-94-6463-042-8_199

Simulation of Canadian S&P/TSX Composite Index for the First 20 Years in the 21st Century with Random Walk Model

2023· book-chapter· en· W4320500374 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shaomin Yan, Guang Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in computer science research · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandom walkStock exchangeComposite indexEconometricsIndex (typography)StatisticsEquity (law)CapitalizationRandom walk hypothesisMathematicsStock (firearms)Stock marketEconomicsGeographyComputer sciencePolitical scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian S&P/TSX Composite Index is a capitalization-weighted equity index that records the stock performance in Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX), which is the primary stock exchange in Canada.The S&P/TSX is closely monitored by investors and becomes a barometer for the health of the Canadian economy.The random walk model is an important tool to prove or disprove the efficient market hypothesis (EMH).Generally, the use of random walk model to test this hypothesis is conducted using statistical tests.Recently, we conducted a series of studies to use the random walk model to directly simulate/fit the major stock indices around the world.As a part of such an effort, we use the random walk model to simulate the S&P/TSX for the first 20 years in the 21 st century in this study.The results show that the random walk model can satisfyingly simulate the S&P/TSX trend for the long period, but fails for short periods.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.460
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.248
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in computer science researchSame topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207