MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321446360 · doi:10.1111/auar.12395

Bayesian Investor Belief Updating Speed and Market Underreaction to Earnings Announcements

2023· article· en· W4321446360 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Accounting Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersXiamen UniversityMinistry of Education of the People's Republic of ChinaRenmin University of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaDeakin University
KeywordsEarningsBayesian probabilityEconometricsBayesian inferenceEconomicsDuration (music)Information asymmetryEarnings growthFinancial economicsComputer scienceMicroeconomicsAccountingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Building on the Bayesian Theorem, we propose a multi‐period market microstructure model to understand how Bayesian investors underact new information and the duration of market underreaction. Applying the model to post‐earnings‐announcement drifts, our simulation and regression analyses show that the duration of the post‐announcement price adjustment process and the post‐announcement drifts can be explained by the new measure of belief updating speed that quantifies the uncertainties faced by Bayesian investors when incorporating new information into prices. Our study highlights the importance of incorporating the belief uncertainties of uninformed investors in explaining market underreaction in the Bayesian framework.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.221 · 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