Study of Speculative Trading Risks Based on Example of Short Squeezing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Financial derivatives are essential hedging tools in modern financial markets.Since the 1990s, China's over-the-counter derivatives market has developed rapidly, occupying an important position in the world and playing an important role in economic and financial development.However, the open development of the derivatives market also faces risks.From the perspective of international markets, the overuse of poorly managed derivatives markets and overdevelopment that does not match regulatory capacity can generate risks in many ways.The opening of China's derivatives market to foreign financial entities also poses a potential systemic risk, which may threaten national financial security in serious cases and requires high vigilance.General financial products and simple derivatives form complex derivatives by nesting various complex structures with high leverage and betting characteristics, which can pry the financial market or become a tool to manipulate the financial market under special circumstances, thus affecting financial institutions and impacting the financial system.Based on the current situation of the development and regulation of China's derivatives market, the cases of overseas hedging losses and the potential systemic risks that may be increased by financial opening, it is suggested that the planning of the development and opening path of China's derivatives market and the regulatory system can be further improved to prevent and control the accumulation of potential systemic risks.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".