MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401567601 · doi:10.1016/j.jfineco.2024.103916

Efficient estimation of bid–ask spreads from open, high, low, and close prices

2024· article· en· W4401567601 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

VenueJournal of Financial Economics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAuction Theory and Applications
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision AnalysisHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBid priceAsk priceEstimationEconomicsBusinessEconometricsFinancial economicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Popular bid–ask spread estimators are downward biased when trading is infrequent. Moreover, they consider only a subset of open, high, low, and close prices and neglect potentially useful information to improve the spread estimate. By accounting for discretely observed prices, this paper derives asymptotically unbiased estimators of the effective bid–ask spread. Moreover, we combine them optimally to minimize the estimation variance and obtain an efficient estimator. Through theoretical analyses, numerical simulations, and empirical evaluations, we show that our efficient estimator dominates other estimators from transaction prices, yields novel insights for measuring bid–ask spreads, and has broad applicability in empirical finance.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.302 · 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